Being  a  true  record  of  his  life 
and  struggles  to  introduce  his 
greatest  invention,  the  reaper, 
and  its  success,  as  gathered 
from  pamphlets  published  here- 
tofore by  some  of  his  friends 
and  associates,  and  reprinted 
in  this  volume,  together  with 
some  additional  facts  and  tes- 
timonials from  other  sources. 


EDITED  BY 
FOLLETT    L.    GREENO 


COPYRIGHTED    1912 
BY    FOLLETT    L.    GREENO 


PREFACE 

EVERY  STEP  in  the  progress  of  modern 
achievement  has  been  met  with  strong 
resistance  and  hostile  contest.  There  is  in 
business  an  actual  firing  line  where  continu- 
ous conflict  wages,  and  so  fierce  does  the  strug- 
gle become  that  it  requires  a  certain  class  of 
men  possessing  qualities,  not  only  of  energy 
and  perseverance,  but  of  tenacity  and  combat- 
iveness,  aggressive  and  determined  to  fight  to 
the  last  ditch  for  commercial  supremacy.  Such 
men  do  not  always  rely  upon  the  merits  of  their 
cause,  nor  do  they  stop  to  question  the  justice 
or  injustice  of  their  methods.  They  have  but 
one  goal,  commercial  supremacy,  and  every 
effort  is  bent  and  every  man  and  method  util- 
ized to  attain  that  end. 

Men  of  inventive  genius  are  rarely  of  that 
type.  They  are  more  often  unassuming  and 
averse  to  anything  like  a  personal  combat. 
Such  a  man  was  Obed  Hussey,  inventor  of  the 
reaper.  Honest  and  conscientious,  enured  to 
hard  and  unremitting  toil,  with  the  inspiration 
of  a  new  idea  for  the  benefit  of  mankind  burn- 
ing in  his  brain,  he  applied  himself  in  the  face 
of  immense  difficulties  to  the  production  and 
perfection  of  the  great  gift  which  he  gave  to 
the  world.  He  was  a  man  at  once  so  humble 
and  so  broad  in  his  kindness,  so  loyal  to  his 


Quaker  ideals  of  righteousness  and  justice, 
that  he  offered  no  protests,  or  arguments 
against  his  rivals  and  opponents  other  than  the 
superiority  of  his  own  machine.  Only  his 
great  genius  which  produced  the  superior  ma- 
chine (a  fact  which  no  one  could  possibly  con- 
tradict) could  have  saved  him  from  the  fierce 
opposition  of  his  more  powerful  rivals.  One 
has  only  to  read  from  some  of  his  own  letters 
reproduced  in  this  narrative,  to  witness  the 
fairness  of  his  attitude,  or  to  gain  a  knowledge 
of  his  scruples. 

Yet  it  was  just  this  which  has  operated  to 
deprive  Obed  Hussey  of  his  well  deserved 
fame  as  inventor  of  the  reaper.  Moreover,  a 
great  industry,  fostered  by  his  opponents  in 
the  patent  controversy,  has  grown  up,  the  basis 
and  life  of  which  is  Obed  Hussey's  invention 
of  the  reaper.  It  would  seem  that  the  vast 
fortunes  made  from  this  industry  should  be 
ample  reward  for  those  who  are  receiving  the 
benefits  of  a  man's  life  work  without  whose 
genius  it  would  never  have  been. 

In  1897  there  was  published  in  Chicago  a 
booklet  entitled  "A  Brief  Narrative  of  the  In- 
vention of  Reaping  Machines,"  a  large  part  of 
which  is  reproduced  in  this  book.  The  pam- 
phlets of  which  the  narrative  was  a  republica- 
tion  were  from  the  pen  of  Edward  Stabler,  an 
able  man  and  a  mechanic  of  great  skill  and 


ability,  a  close  friend  of  Mr.  Hussey  and  one 
familiar  with  his  reaper  and  with  all  the  facts 
which  he  set  forth  in  these  articles.  Such 
other  facts  and  information  as  are  published 
herein  were  furnished  by  Martha  Hussey, 
daughter  of  Mr.  Hussey,  now  living  and  by 
my  uncle,  Hon.  Alexander  B.  Lamberton,  who 
married  Mr.  Hussey's  widow.  Mr.  Lamberton 
is  a  man  of  high  standing,  having  for  many 
years  taken  an  active  part  in  the  affairs  of 
Rochester.  He  was  President  of  the  Roches- 
ter Chamber  of  Commerce,  1901-1904  (three 
successive  terms),  and  has  been  President  of 
the  Rochester  Park  Board  for  the  past  eleven 
years.  He  also  won  national  fame  as  a  hunter 
and  naturalist  and  was  President  of  the  Na- 
tional Association  for  the  Protection  of  Fish 
and  Game.  His  relation  to  the  Hussey  family 
has  made  him  conversant  with  the  whole  his- 
tory of  the  invention  of  the  reaper  and  of  Mr. 
Hussey's  early  struggles. 

The  facts  as  set  forth  in  this  volume  are 
well  known  to  the  reaper  men  of  the  United 
States,  men  high  up  in  the  industry.  Had 
Mr.  Hussey  lived,  he  would  have  been  able  to 
establish  his  claim  to  the  invention  of  the 
reaper  beyond  the  shadow  of  a  doubt.  This 
humble  man,  who,  against  tremendous  odds 
and  powerful  opposition,  proved  his  conten- 
tions before  Congress  and  the  United  States 
3 


Patent  Office  could  certainly  have  won  de- 
served fame  with  the  public. 

His  tragic  death,  which  came  just  at  the 
time  when  his  Congressional  victory  was  cer- 
tain and  the  future  of  his  reaper  seemed 
bright  with  promise,  occurred  while  he  was 
en  route  from  Boston  to  Portland,  Maine,  on 
August  4,  1860.  In  those  days  there  was  often 
no  water  in  the  cars.  The  train  had  stopped  at 
a  station  when  a  little  child  asked  for  a  drink 
of  water  and  Mr.  Hussey  stepped  out  to  get  it 
for  her.  On  his  return,  as  he  attempted  to  re- 
enter,  the  cars  started;  he  was  thrown  be- 
neath the  wheels  and  instantly  killed.  The 
last  act  of  his  life  was  one  of  kindness  and  com- 
passion. 

Obed  Hussey  is  dead,  but  his  machine  still 
lives,  an  article  of  measureless  value  to  the 
great  world  of  agriculture.  His  life  was  one 
of  long  suffering  and  faithful  service  and  he 
justly  deserves  the  proper  credit  and  honor  for 
his  great  invention.  To  Obed  Hussey  belongs 
the  fame  of  Inventor  of  the  Reaper  as  these 
pages  will  show,  to  which  purpose  these  facts 
are  published  by  those  who  knew  him  and  his 
works,  and  these  facts,  like  his  works,  stand 
squarely  on  their  own  merits. 

FOLLETT  L.  GREENO. 

Rochester,  N.  Y.,  April  21,  1912. 
4 


Obed    Hussey 
Inventor  of  the  Reaper 


OBED   HUSSEY,   THE    INVENTOR 
OF  THE   REAPER 

Obed  Hussey  was  of  Quaker  stock,  born  in 
Maine  in  1792  and  early  removed  to  Nan- 
tucket,  Mass.  When  young,  like  all  Nantucket 
boys,  he  had  a  desire  to  go  to  sea,  and  made 
one  or  two  whaling  voyages.  He  was  of  quiet 
and  retiring  disposition,  studious,  thoughtful, 
with  a  strong  bent  for  studying  intricate  me- 
chanical contrivances.  Little  is  known  of  his 
early  life  and  there  is  none  living  who  knew  A 
him  at  that  time.  He  was  a  skillful  draftsman  IQVU  a 
and  incessant  worker  at  different  inventions 
all  his  life.  He  invented  a  successful  steam 
plow,  for  which  he  obtained  a  medal  in  the 
West.  He  also  invented  a  machine  for  grind- 
ing out  hooks  and  eyes,  a  mill  for  grinding 
corn  and  cobs,  a  husking  machine  run  by 
horse  power,  the  "iron  finger  bar,"  a  machine 
for  crushing  sugar  cane,  a  machine  for  making 
artificial  ice,  and  other  devices  of  more  or  less 
note. 

His  chief  characteristic  seems  to  have  been 
an  extremely  sensitive,  modest  and  unassum- 
ing personality.  It  was  this  reticence  which 
has  served  to  keep  him  in  the  background  as 
the  inventor  of  the  reaper.  He  was  unwilling 
to  push  himself  forward,  and  his  claim  to  dis- 

5 


tinction  has  had  to  rest  solely  upon  the  merits 
of  his  greatest  invention. 

Mr.  Hussey  first  began  work  on  his  reaper 
in  a  room  at  the  factory  of  Richard  B.  Cheno- 
weth,  a  manufacturer  of  agricultural  imple- 
ments, and  the  story  of  those  early  efforts  is 
told  by  Sarah  A.  Chenoweth,  a  granddaughter 
of  the  latter: 

Early  "As  a  child,  it  seemed  that  I  had  always 
Efforts  known  Mr.  Hussey.  I  saw  him  every  day  of  my 
life,  for  he  lived  in  a  room,  the  use  of  which  my 
grandfather,  Richard  B.  Chenoweth,  a  manu- 
facturer of  agricultural  implements  in  Balti- 
more City,  had  given  him  at  his  factory.  No 
grown  person  was  allowed  to  enter,  for  in  this 
room  he  spent  most  of  his  time  making  pat- 
terns for  the  perfecting  of  his  reaper.  I,  un- 
forbidden,  was  his  constant  visitor,  and  asked 
him  numberless  questions,  one  of  which,  I  re- 
member, was  why  he  washed  and  dried  his 
dishes  with  shavings.  His  reply  was  charac- 
teristic of  himself,  'Shavings  are  clean.' 

"At  this  time  I  was  about  seven  years  of 
age,  having  been  born  in  1824.  Although  very 
poor  at  the  time,  he  was  a  man  of  education, 
upright  and  honorable,  and  so  very  gentle  in 
both  speech  and  manner  that  I  never  knew  fear 
or  awe  of  him.  I  do  not  know  for  a  certainty 
how  long  he  remained  there, — several  years, 
at  the  least,  I  think,  but  of  his  connection  with 

6 


the  reaper,  I  am  positive,  for  it  was  talked  of 
morning,  noon  and  night.  To  this  day,  my 
brother  bears  on  his  finger  a  scar,  made  by  re- 
ceiving a  cut  from  one  of  the  teeth  of  the  ma- 
chine. When,  finally,  the  model  was  com-  First 
pleted,  it  was  brought  out  into  the  yard  of  the  Trial 
factory  for  trial.  This  trial  was  made  on  a 
board,  drilled  with  holes,  and  stuck  full  of  rye 
straws.  I  helped  to  put  those  very  straws  in 
place.  Mr.  Hussey,  with  repressed  excitement, 
stood  watching,  and  when  he  saw  the  perfect 
success  of  his  invention,  he  hastened  to  his 
room  too  moved  and  agitated  to  speak.  This 
scene  is  vividly  impressed  on  my  mind,  as  is 
also  a  remark  made  by  a  workman,  that  Mr. 
Hussey  did  not  wish  us  to  see  the  tears  in  his 
eyes." 

The  story  of  Mr.  Hussey's  efforts  at  that 
time  is  also  told  by  a  brother  of  the  little  grand- 
daughter : 

"Chicago,  Nov.  25,  1893. 
"Clark  Lane,  Esq., 

"Elkhart,  Ind. 

"My  Dear  Sir:— 

"I  notice  in  this  morning's  'Inter  Ocean'  your 
letter  of  22nd  in  regard  to  the  First  Reaper  and 
Obed  Hussey ;  now  I  can  say  that  the  name  of 
Obed  Hussey  called  to  my  mind  the  best  friend 
of  my  boyhood  days,  as  he  was  in  the  habit 

7 


of  keeping  me  supplied  with  pennies  when  I 
was  short,  and  taught  me  how  to  put  iron  on 
a  wood  sled,  and  helped  me  to  make  my  first 
wagon  as  he  turned  the  wheel  for  me.  You  are 
right  with  regard  to  the  date  of  the  fingers  and 
shaped  cutters  for  Reapers,  as  I  saw  and 
handled  it,  to  my  sorrow  in  1833  or  '34  before 
the  machine  was  finished  and  nearly  cut  my 
fingers  off.  I  have  the  whole  thing  photo- 
graphed in  my  mind  and  can  show  the  spot 
or  within  10  feet  of  it  where  I  lay  on  the  floor. 
It  was  not  possible  to  try  it  in  Maryland,  owing 
to  the  hilly  nature  of  the  ground,  and  was  after- 
wards taken  to  Ohio  for  trial  and  was  rebuilt 
there,  or  at  least  a  part  of  it,  but  of  that  part 
(the  rebuilding)  I  do  not  know  for  a  certainty, 
but  the  bars,  fingers  and  knives  I  do  most  posi- 
tively remember,  as  I  was  a  lad  of  some  eight 
or  nine  years  old  with  a  mechanical  turn  of 
mind  and  was  looking  into  what  seemed 
strange  to  me,  hence  I  cut  my  finger  so  bad 
that  I  carried  the  scar  for  a  number  of  years. 
I  very  distinctly  remember  the  incomplete 
reaper  made  by  my  old  friend,  Obed  Hussey, 
as  it  was  made  in  my  grandfather's  shop  in 
Baltimore,  Maryland,  who  was  at  that  time 
the  leading  plow-maker  of  the  U.  S.  and  that 
it  was  made  either  in  1833  or  '34,  as  I  would 
not  have  had  a  chance  to  see  it  if  later  than  '34 
as  I  was  not  at  home  until  '38,  when  it  had  been 

8 


sent,  as  I  was  told,  to  Ohio  for  trial  and  some 
parts  had  to  be  rebuilt. 

"Please  excuse  the  liberty  I  have  taken  in 
writing  to  you,  but  I  could  not  resist  the  temp- 
tation to  give  my  tribute  to  my  old  friend,  O. 
Hussey.  «Very  respectfuiiy  yours, 

(Signed)     "W.  H.  CHENOWETH." 

The  machine  referred  to  was,  no  doubt,  the 
reaper  completed  and  tested  near  Cincinnati 
in  the  harvest  of  1833. 

It  is  not  known  when  Mr.  Hussey  left  the  The  First 
Chenoweth  factory,  but  during  the  winter  of  ReaP«r 
1832-33  he  was  at  Cincinnati  working  upon  the 
reaper  that,  more  than  else,  won  him  lasting 
fame  during  the  harvest  of  1833.  The  "Me- 
chanics Magazine"  for  April,  1834,  contains  an 
illustration  of  "  Hussey 's  Grain  Cutter."  The 
picture  does  not  represent  the  model  deposited 
in  the  Patent  Office  with  his  application,  for  it 
differs  in  many  essentials  from  the  drawing  of 
the  patent,  which,  of  course,  corresponded  with 
the  model  there  filed.  It  has  neither  divider 
nor  outer  wheel,  and  the  construction  of  the 
platform  differs  from  that  of  his  regular  ma- 
chine. It  is  thought  that  the  picture  represents 
the  small  working  model  made  at  the  Cheno- 
weth factory,  mentioned  by  the  little  girl. 

Mr.  Hussey  found  one  who  took  an  interest 
in  his  invention  and  became  so  confident  of  its 


Financing  value  that  he  provided  the  necessary  funds  and 
the  First  mechanical     facilities     for    manufacturing     a 
eaper  reaper  to  be  tested  in  the  field.    This  was  Jar- 
vis  Reynolds,  of  Cincinnati.     Drawings  were 
made  of  the  cutting  apparatus  and  a  descrip- 
tion of  it  was  sent  by  the  inventor  to  a  friend, 
Edwin  G.  Pratt,  early  in  1833. 

Another  personal  friend  of  Obed  Hussey 
was  Edward  Stabler,  who  lived  at  Sandy  Hill, 
Maryland,  and  was,  as  he  termed  himself,  "a 
farmer  and  a  mechanic."    That  he  was  a  me- 
chanic of  ability  is  evidenced  by  government 
seals  which  were  cut  by  him,   that  for  the 
Smithsonian  Institute  being  worthy  of  men- 
The  tion  as  an  example  of  his  skill.    He  was  a  post- 
Reaper  master  from  President  Jackson's  time  until  his 

Historian  Qwn  <jeath.  He  is  the  only  one  who  may  be 
said  to  have  acted  as  Hussey's  historian,  and 
has  left  very  much  valuable  information  in  the 
form  of  letters,  legal  papers,  et  cetera.  In  1854 
and  '55  he  published  "A  Brief  Narrative  of  the 
Invention  of  Reaping  Machines,"  "Hussey's 
Reaping  Machine  in  England,"  and  "A  Review 
of  the  Pamphlet  of  W.  N.  P.  Fitzgerald  in  Op- 
position to  the  Extension  of  the  Patent  of 
Obed  Hussey ;  and  also  of  the  Defense,  of  Evi- 
dence in  Favor  of  Said  Extention,"  etc.  There 
is  sufficient  data  obtainable  from  Mr.  Stabler's 
various  publications  and  material  in  the  Con- 
gressional Library  to  enable  one  to  judge  for 
10 


himself  whether  the  honors  placed  upon  this 
inventor  by  the  Patent  Office,  the  Courts,  by 
Congress,  and  by  the  farmer  were  earned. 

It  was  at  the  time  Mr.  Hussey  was  residing 
in  Baltimore  that  he  turned  his  attention  to  the 
idea  of  a  reaping  machine  and  spent  his  leisure 
hours  in  working  out  his  model.  This  satisfied 
him  that  the  thing  was  practical,  and  he  under- 
took an  operating  machine,  which,  although 
lightly  made,  was  fully  sufficient  to  test  the 
great  principle.  At  this  time  he  had  no  knowl- 
edge whether  any  others  had  undertaken  any- 
thing in  this  direction  and  there  was  nothing 
in  his  own  mechanical  occupation  which  would 
make  him  familiar  wth  the  subject. 

As  the  only  other  claimant  for  the  honor  of  McCormick 
inventing  the  reaper  was   Cyrus   H.   McCor-  Claims 
mick,  reference  is  here  made  to  a  book  entitled 
"Memorial  of  Robert  McCormick,"  the  father 
of  Cyrus  H.  McCormick,  Leander  J.  McCor- 
mick and  William  S.  McCormick,  published  by 
the  said  Leander  J.  McCormick  in  1885,  pages 
44  to  the  bottom  of  page  51,  also  pages  58  to 
61  inclusive,  from  which  I  extract: 

"Now,  while  we  have  no  disposition  to  ques- 
tion the  merits  of  the  so-called  McCormick  har- 
vester and  binder,  which,  without  doubt,  is  a 
good  machine, — though  the  judgment  of  for- 
eigners as  to  its  value  is  of  no  consequence, — 
we  do  assert  that  C.  H.  McCormick  was  not 
11 


Denial  by  entitled  to  any  of  the  honors  showered  upon 
Members  of  fam  as  jts  inventor.     To  be  more  explicit,  he 

McCormick  .       ..  .         ....  , ,  .  ,  .  . 

_  .j  not  only  did  not  invent  the  said  machine,  nor 
mechanically  assist  in  the  combinations  of  the 
inventions  of  others  which  produced  it,  but  he 
never  invented  or  produced  any  essential  ele- 
mentary part  in  any  reaping  or  harvesting  ma- 
chine from  the  first  to  last.  These  assertions 
are  broad,  but  absolutely  true.  They  stand 
squarely  upon  the  records  and  the  history  and 
state  of  the  art.  C.  H.  McCormick,  or  any  one 
for  him,  cannot  deny  them  with  proofs,  there- 
fore he  is  not  entitled  to  recognition  as  the  man 
who  'has  done  more  to  elevate  agriculture  than 
any  man  the  world  has  produced/  because  of 
his  supposed  inventions  in  this  line ;  but  on  the 
contrary,  that  the  development  of  Western  ag- 
riculture has  elevated  him,  and  that  he  has 
more  money,  and  received  more  honors,  'than 
any  man  the  world  has  produced,'  by  appro- 
priating the  brains  of  others,  and  the  credit  due 
them  as  inventors,  are  propositions  much  more 

defensible." 

****** 

Their         "But  the  man  who  is  entitled  to  the  most 
Affirmation  credit,  as  inventor  and  pioneer  in  this  business, 

iS    °bed    HuSSeV'    Wh°'    December    31st»    1833» 

patented  the  machine  (successfully  operated  in 
previous  harvest,  well  known  and  in  use  since 
to  this  day),  which  combined  all  the  main  fea- 

12 


tures — except  the  reel,  which  was  then  an  old 
device — of  practical  reapers  down  to  the  time, 
at  least,  when  'harvesters,'  so-called,  came  into 
the  field." 

The  following  is  also  copies  from  "Memo- 
rial of  Robert  McCormick,"  published  by 
Leander  J.  McCormick  in  1885: 

TO  THE  CONGRESS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES 
"REMONSTRANCE" 

"Of  the  Citizens  of  New  York  against  the  re- 
newal of  Letters  Patent  granted  to  Cyrus  H. 
McCormick,  June  21,  1834,  for  improvements 
in  the  Reaping  Machine. 

"Among  the  early  reaper  inventors  of  this 
country,  Mr.  Obed  Hussey,  now  of  Baltimore, 
stood  for  many  years  deservedly  the  most 
prominent,  and  he  has  doubtless  by  his  genius 
and  indefatigable  exertions  (although  in  a 
modest  way)  contributed  more  to  the  advance- 
ment of  this  invention  than  any  other  man.  He 
first  tested  his  machine  in  1833,  and  took  out  a 
patent  for  it  the  31st  of  December  of  that  year. 

"He  first  constructed  his  machine  with  a  The  First 
reel  to  gather  the  grain  up  to  the  cutters,  and  Machme 
throw  it  upon  the  platform;  but  on  trial,  with 
his  cutter,  he  thought  it  unnecessary  and  only 
an  incumbrance,  and,  therefore,  threw  it  aside 
and  has  never  used  it  since.    The  main  frame- 
is 


work  containing  the  gearing  was  suspended  on 
two  wheels  about  three  feet  four  inches  in 
diameter.  The  platform  was  attached  to  the 
rear  of  this  frame,  and  extended  out  one  side 
of  it  say  six  feet.  The  team  was  attached  to 
the  front  end  of  the  frame  and  traveled  at  the 
side  of  the  standing  grain  as  in  Randall's  ma- 
chine. The  cutting  apparatus  was  pretty  much 
the  same  as  now  used  in  Hussey's  machine. 
The  knife  is  constructed  of  steel  plates,  riveted 
to  a  flat  bar  of  iron.  These  plates  are  three 
inches  broad  at  the  end  where  they  are  riveted 
to  the  bar,  and  four  and  a  half  inches  long,  pro- 
jecting in  front,  and  tapering  nearly  to  a  point, 
forming  what  is  described  as  a  saw  with  very 
coarse  teeth,  which  are  sharp  on  both  edges. 
This  cutter  is  supported  on  what  he  terms 
guards,  which  are  attached  to  the  front  edge  of 
the  platform  or  cutter-bar  (as  termed  by  Hus- 
sey),  one  every  three  inches  the  whole  width 
of  the  machine,  projecting  horizontally  in  front 
about  six  or  eight  inches.  These  guards  have 
long  slots  through  them  horizontally  through 
which  the  cutter  vibrates,  and  thus  form  a 
support  for  the  grain  whilst  it  is  cut,  and  pro- 
tect the  cutter  from  liability  to  injury  from 
large  stones  and  other  obstructions.  The  cut- 
ter is  attached  by  means  of  a  pitman  rod  to  a 
crank,  which  is  put  in  motion  by  gearing  con- 
necting with  one  or  both  of  the  ground  wheels 
14 


as  may  be  desired,  according  to  circumstances, 
which  gives  to  the  cutter  as  the  machine  ad- 
vances, a  quick  vibrating  motion;  and  each 
point  of  the  cutter  vibrates  from  the  centre  of 
one  guard,  through  the  space  between,  to  the 
centre  of  the  next,  thus  cutting  equally  both 
ways.  As  the  machine  advances,  the  grain  is 
readily  cut,  and  the  butts  are  carried  along  with 
the  machine  which  causes  the  tops  to  fall  back 
upon  the  platform  without  the  aid  of  the  reel. 
The  grain  to  be  cut  was  separated  from  that 
to  be  left  standing  by  means  of  a  point  project- 
ing in  front  of  the  cutter,  in  the  form  of  a 
wedge,  bearing  the  grain  both  inwards  and  out- 
wards, with  a  board  set  edgewise  upon  it,  slop- 
ing downwards,  to  a  point  in  front.  The  grain 
was  raked  from  the  machine  by  a  man  riding 
upon  it,  in  rear  of  the  frame,  at  the  side  of  the 
cutter,  nearly  in  range  with  the  guards,  with 
his  back  towards  the  team,  sometimes  at  the 
side  and  sometimes  behind  the  platform.  Soon 
after  this  date  Mr.  Hussey  changed  the  con- 
struction of  his  machine  somewhat,  used  one 
large  ground  wheel  instead  of  two,  placed  the 
platform  alongside  the  frame,  and  placed  his 
raker  on  a  seat  by  the  side  of  the  large  ground 
wheel,  facing  the  team,  and  raked  the  grain  off 
in  rear  of  the  platform. 

"This  was  for  many  years  doubtless  the  The  Most 
most  practical  reaping  machine  known,  and,  Practical 

15 


with  the  improvements  that  have  been  made 
upon  it,  from  time  to  time,  it  is  now  preferred 
to  any  other  in  many  wheat  growing  sections 
of  the  country." 

The  fact  and  intensity  of  Mr.  Hussey's 
struggles  may,  in  part,  be  gathered  from  his 
letter  to  Edward  Stabler,  dated  March  12, 
1854: 

"Baltimore,  March  12,  1854. 

"My  Esteemed  Friend,  Edward  Stabler : — 

"I  think  the  work  goes  bravely  on.  I  am 
unable  to  express  my  estimation  of  thy  disin- 
terested efforts;  I  never  before  experienced 
anything  of  the  kind ;  it  seems  entirely  new  to 
me  to  have  any  one  go  out  of  their  way  so 
much,  to  do  so  much  for  me.  I  am  not  so  much 
surprised  at  the  progress  thee  makes  consider- 
ing the  man,  as  I  am  that  any  man  could  be 
found  to  do  me  such  a  service.  I  hope  thee 
will  not  get  weary;  I  am  sure  thee  will  not. 
I  hope  the  Committee  will  not  act  so  unjustly 
as  to  turn  their  backs  on  all  cases  because  there 
is  'rascality'  in  some ;  because  there  is  rascality 
in  some  cases,  why  should  a  just  cause  suffer? 
The  facts  in  my  case  can  be  easily  proved.  I 
made  no  money  during  the  existence  of  my 
patent,  or  I  might  say  I  made  less  than  I  would 
have  made  if  I  had  held  an  under-clerk's  posi- 
tion in  the  Patent  Office;  I  would  have  been 

16 


better  off  at  the  end  of  the  14  years  if  I  had 
filled  exactly  such  station  as  my  foreman  holds, 
and  got  his  pay,  and  would  not  have  had  half 
the  hard  work,  nor  a  hundredth  part  of  the 
heart-aching.  I  never  experienced  half  the 
fatigue  in  rowing  after  a  whale  in  the  Pacific 
Ocean  (which  I  have  often  done)  as  I  experi- 
enced year  after  year  for  eighteen  years  in  the 
harvest  field,  I  might  say  twenty  years,  for  I 
worked  as  hard  in  England  as  I  do  at  home, 
for  in  the  harvest,  wherever  I  am  there  is  no 
rest  for  me.  If  I  am  guilty  of  no  rascality  why 
should  I  not  be  compensated  for  toiling  to  in- 
troduce an  invention  which  I  thought  to  be  of 
so  much  advantage  to  the  World.  I  know  I 
was  the  first  one  who  successfully  accom- 
plished the  cutting  of  grain  and  grass  by  ma- 
chinery. If  others  tried  to  do  it  before  me  it 
was  not  doing  it;  being  the  first  who  ever  did 
it,  why  should  I  be  obliged  to  suffer  and  toil  Mr. 
most,  and  get  the  least  by  it?  No  man  knows  Hussey'8 
how  much  I  have  suffered  in  body  and  mind 
since  1833,  on  account  of  this  thing,  the  first 
year  I  operated  it  in  Balto.  Three  years  after 
I  cut  the  first  crop,  I  could  not  go  to  meet- 
ing for  many  weeks  for  want  of  a  decent  coat, 
while  for  economy  I  made  my  own  coffee  and 
eat,  slept  in  my  shop,  until  I  had  sold  machines 
enough  to  be  able  to  do  better;  there  was  no 
rascality  in  all  that.  My  machines  then  cost 

17 


me  nearly  all  I  got  for  them  when  counting 
moderate  wages  for  my  own  labour.  The 
Quaker  who  lent  me  the  ninety  dollars  ten 
years  afterward  would  not  then  (ten  years 
before)  trust  me  for  iron,  one  who  was  not  a 
Quaker  did.  There  is  one  thing  not  generally 
understood;  thou  will  remember  the  trial  at 
Lloyd's,  thou  remembers  also  that  I  received 
the  purse  of  100  dollars;  now  what  would  the 
world  suppose  I  would  do  ?  Why  that  I  would 
do  like  the  flour  holders,  keep  the  price  up! 
But  it  is  a  fact  and  can  be  proved,  that  after  it 
was  announced  to  me  that  the  verdict  was  in 
my  favor  I  said  to  a  gentleman  now  I  will  re- 
duce my  price  10  dollars,  on  each  machine,  and 
I  did  it,  from  that  hour  and  did  not  breathe 
my  intention  until  after  that  decision  was  an- 
nounced to  me!  Where  is  the  man  who  has 
done  the  like  under  similar  circumstances? 
There  is  no  'rascality'  in  that.  Now  I  do  not 
believe  that  there  is  a  reaper  in  the  country 
(which  is  good  for  anything)  at  so  low  a  price 
as  mine,  and  not  one  on  which  so  little  profit 
is  made. 

"I  will  inclose  a  pamphlet  which  I  suppose 
thee  has  already  seen — it  may  be  useful. 

"Thy  friend, 
(Signed)     "OBED  HUSSEY." 


18 


Mr.  William  N.  Whitely,  an  early  inventor 
and  manufacturer  of  harvesting  machinery, 
who  was  for  many  years  the  king  of  the  reaper 
business,  and  who  fought  the  Hussey  extension 
"tooth  and  nail,"  on  January  8,  1897,  wrote  to 
the  "Farm  Implement  News"  upon  the  subject 
of  McCormick's  portrait  on  the  silver  certifi- 
cates, then  about  to  be  issued,  in  which  he  re- 
fers also  to  Mr.  Hussey,  as  follows : 

"Editor  'Farm  Implement  News' : 

"Having  been  informed  that  the  bureau  of  tfae  Pen  o{ 
engraving  and  printing  was  preparing  new  $10  a  Hussey 
silver  certificates  to  be  ornamented  by  the  busts  Opponent 
of  Whitney,  the  inventor  of  the  cotton  gin,  and 
C.  H.  McCormick,  'inventor  of  the  reaper,'  I 
write  you  to  say  that  it  would  manifestly  be  un- 
just to  credit  the  invention  of  the  reaper  to  any 
one  man.  Mr.  McCormick  does  deserve  great 
credit  for  his  enterprise  and  business  skill  in 
the  many  years  he  was  engaged  in  manufactur- 
ing harvesting  machinery  and  we  are  pleased 
to  honor  his  memory;  yet  so  much  has  been 
done  in  bringing  the  reaper  to  its  present  state 
of  perfection  by  the  many  thousands  of  in- 
ventors that  our  government  would  make  a 
mistake  in  singling  out  Mr.  McCormick  from 
the  many  meritorious  ones  who  have  contrib- 
uted so  much  to  the  reaper  of  the  past  and  of 
the  present  day.  We  well  understand  that  no 

19 


effort  has  been  spared  for  many  years  past  in 
keeping  C.  H.  McCormick  before  the  American 
people  as  the  inventor  of  the  reaper  by  his  im- 
mediate relatives  and  friends,  and  we  have  no 
right  to  find  fault  with  such  a  course  upon  their 
part;  but  when  the  great  government  of  the 
United  States  of  America  proposes  to  certify 
by  the  above  mentioned  course  to  the  correct- 
ness of  the  claims  made  for  C.  H.  McCormick 
as  the  inventor  of  the  reaper,  to  the  disparage- 
ment of  so  many  other  worthy  inventors  and 
co-workers  upon  the  reaper,  then  those  who 
know  better  should  raise  their  voices  against 
such  an  attempted  recognition  for  any  one 
man,  of  whom  the  best  that  can  be  said  is  that 
he  was  only  one  of  the  many. 

"From  1831  to  1834,  and  for  several  years 
thereafter,  two  persons,  i.  e.,  Obed  Hussey  and 
C.  H.  McCormick,  were  striving  to  produce  a 
successful  reaping  machine  for  cutting  grain 
and  grass,  as  were  many  others,  before  and 
since.  These  two  men  were  contemporaneous- 
ly in  the  field,  and  no  doubt  they  both  labored 
faithfully  to  accomplish  the  desired  result.  The 
invention  of  Obed  Hussey,  the  features  of 
which  were  embraced  in  his  first  machine  in 
1832  and  1833,  included  all  the  principles  of  a 
practical  reaper.  It  was  a  side  draft  or  side 
cut  machine ;  that  is,  the  cutting  apparatus  ex- 
tended out  to  one  side,  the  animals  drawing 

20 


the  machine  moving  along  by  the  side  of  the 
grain  or  grass  to  be  cut.  It  had  two  driving 
and  supporting  wheels,  gearing  extending  rear- 
ward with  a  crank  and  pitman  therefrom  to 
reciprocate  the  cutters,  which  were  scalloped 
or  projecting  blades  from  a  bar  and  vibrated 
through  slotted  guard  fingers  which  held  the 
stalks  to  be  cut.  The  cutting  apparatus  was 
hinged  to  the  side  of  the  frame  of  the  machine 
to  enable  it  to  follow  the  surface  of  the  ground 
over  which  the  machine  was  passing.  A  plat- 
form was  supported  by  an  outer  and  inner 
wheel.  The  operator  was  seated  upon  the  ma- 
chine and  raked  the  grain  into  sheaves  from 
the  platform  as  it  was  cut.  Over  sixty  years 
have  come  and  gone,  yet  all  the  essential  fea- 
tures of  the  first  Hussey  machine  and  all  Hus- 
sey  machines  made  thereafter  (which  were 
large  numbers)  employed  substantially  these 
devices.  The  machine  was  successful  the  first 
time  it  was  completed,  and  ever  after  were  the 
Hussey  machines  successful  in  harvesting 
grain  and  grass.  The  fundamental  principles  The  Reaper 


of  all  harvesting  machinery  of  the  world  to-day     s        , 
were  furnished  by  Obed  Hussey's  invention  Contribution 
and  patent  of  1833;  and  while  very  many  and 
valuable  improvements  have  been  made  there- 
on for  harvesting  grain  and  grass,  for  which 
credit  should  be  given  to  the  worthy  inventors 

21 


who  followed  after  Hussey,  yet  we  must  not 
ignore  his  valuable  contribution,  'the  reaper.' 

"Cyrus  H.  McCormick's  first  patent  was 
dated  in  1834.  This  was  known  as  a  push  ma- 
chine with  a  straight  cutter,  the  operator  walk- 
ing by  the  side  of  the  machine  and  raking  the 
grain  from  the  platform.  Other  modifications 
in  after  years  were  made  on  this  machine  by 
Mr.  McCormick;  and  it  may  be  said  that  the 
inventive  genius  of  Obed  Hussey  and  the  busi- 
ness tact  and  skill  of  C.  H.  McCormick  pro- 
duced and  brought  into  practical  use  the  first 
successful  reaping  machine  of  this  or  any  other 
country. 

"Whatever  might  have  been  embodied  in 
the  first  McCormick  machine  or  in  his  experi- 
ments or  machines  for  the  first  fifteen  years  of 
Whose  his  efforts,  the  reaper  of  the  present  day  does 
Machine  not  disclose  any  principles  contained  in  these 
Still  Lives?  early  efforts  of  C  H  McCormick;  but  that 

cannot  be  said  of  Hussey.  A 11  reaping  ma- 
chines of  the  present  day  embody  substantial- 
ly all  of  the  vital  principles  given  by  Obed 
Hussey  in  1833  and  at  different  periods  there- 
after. The  Patent  Office,  as  well  as  other 
sources  of  information,  make  good  these  state- 
ments. 

"Passing,  however,  from  the  early  history 
up  to  the  present  time,  when  the  present  mow- 
ing machines  and  grain  binding  machines  are 


seen  in  operation,  and  taking  into  account  the 
thousands  of  patents  that  have  been  issued  to 
American  inventors  for  various  features  that 
they  have  brought  out,  it  would  be  but  simple 
justice  that  all  be  recognized  as  contributors  to 
the  building  up  of  such  valuable  and  important 
pieces  of  machinery;  and  I  cannot  but  repeat 
that  it  would  be  very  unjust,  unfair  and  un- 
American  to  single  out  one  person,  and  that 
one  Mr.  McCormick,  as  a  representative  to  be 
used  by  the  government  printing  bureau,  when 
it  is  so  well  known  what  he  did  and  what  he 
did  not  do  in  the  invention  of  the  reaper.  It 
would  be  a  false  monument;  it  would  only  be 
respected  by  persons  who  are  ignorant  of  the 
facts. 

"If  this  should  succeed,  it  would  not  be  the 
first  time,  as  likely  it  will  not  be  the  last  time, 
in  the  history  of  mankind  where  those  who  did 
the  work  were  soon  forgotten  and  those  who 
were  more  fortunate  in  being  held  up  and 
prominently  kept  before  the  public  by  their 
friends  or  powerful  allies  received  unjustly  the 
credit." 

It  will  be  seen  from  the  foregoing  extracts  Early 
that  Mr.  Hussey's  machines  went  early  into  the  Ventures  in 
field  in  such  quantities  as  he  and  other  little  Manufacture 
manufacturers  throughout  the  country,  some 
of  whom  ignored  the  exclusive  rights  granted 
him,  could  put  them  out.    They  were  simple, 

23 


and  a  few  castings  were  all  that  was  necessary, 
except  lumber,  which  was  plenty  in  the  forests 
of  the  East  and  in  the  groves  of  the  West,  to 
enable  a  country  wagon  maker  and  blacksmith 
to  put  machines  into  the  field.  Many  of  the 
earlier  inventors,  who  began  the  manufacture 
of  reapers  of  their  own  invention,  followed  that 
course  and  castings  were  sometimes  brought 
from  great  distances.  Mr.  Hussey  applied  for 
an  extension  of  his  1833  patent,  but,  not  know- 
An  ing  the  exact  requirements,  his  application  was 
Unfortunate  offered  too  late,  sixty  days  before  the  expira- 
Delay  tion  of  the  patent  being  the  time  allotted. 
Knowing,  we  presume,  but  little  about  law,  and 
still  less  about  "the  rules  and  regulations  of 
the  Patent  Office"  —  for  all  his  time,  and  con- 
stant labor  with  his  own  hands,  were  required 
in  the  workshop  to  earn  a  bare  support,  —  but 
being  very  desirous  to  obtain  an  extension  of 
his  Patent  before  it  should  expire,  and  also 
having  some  personal  acquaintance  with  Com- 
missioner Ellsworth,  Hussey's  first  application 
was  made  to  him  in  1845,  a  short  time  previous 
to  his  going  out  of  office  ;  certainly  not  less  than 
twelve  months  before  the  expiration.  This  is 
proved  by  the  annexed  letter  : 


"Dear  Sir:-  '<La  Fayette'  Ia"  ^  3>  1854' 

"Your  letter  of  some  weeks  since,  referring 
to  a  conversation  I  had  with  you  while  I  was 

24 


Commissioner  of  Patents,  relative  to  the  exten- 
tion  of  your  patent  for  a  Reaper,  would  have 
been  answered  earlier,  but  for  absence  and  ex- 
treme pressure  of  business. 

"If  my  recollection  will  aid  you,  I  most 
cheerfully  state,  that  before  your  patent  ex- 
pired, you  consulted  me  as  to  the  extension  of 
the  same.  I  replied  that  it  was  better  to  post- 
pone an  application  until  near  the  time  the 
patent  would  run  out,  for  the  Office  must  esti- 
mate the  profits  of  the  invention  during  the 
whole  term ;  and  you  accordingly  postponed  it. 
I  regret  you  postponed  it  too  long.  The  pub- 
lication of  thirty  days  before  the  patent  ex- 
pired, was  a  rule  as  published  by  myself.  If 
you  have  lost  your  opportunity  for  relief 
through  (the)  Patent  Office,  you  must  of 
course  go  to  Congress.  I  have  always  regard- 
ed your  improvement  as  valuable,  and  that  the 
country  is  greatly  indebted  to  your  persevering 
efforts,  notwithstanding  the  obstacles  pre- 
sented. 

"Yours  respectfully, 
"HENRY  L.  ELLSWORTH. 
"Mr.  Obed  Hussey,  Balto.,  Md." 

Hussey  acted  on  this  official  advice,  and  did 
"postpone  an  application  until  near  the  time 
the  patent  would  run  out" — literally  so,  for  he 
was  not  advised  of  even  the  "thirty  days'  rule." 

9& 


Why  Mr.  When  he  again  applied,  and  not  "until  near 

Hussey's        the  time  the  patent  would  run  out,"  Edmund 

Application     Burke  was  Commissioner  of  Patents.  He  states 

in  a  letter  to  Senators  Douglas  and  Shields, 

under  date  March  4th,  1850,  as  follows: 

"In  relation  to  the  patent  of  Hussey,  if  my 
memory  serves  me,  his  patent  expired  some 
time  within  the  latter  part  of  December,  1847. 
During  that  month,  and  within  some  ten  or 
twelve  days  before  the  expiration  of  his  patent, 
he  applied  to  me  as  Commissioner  of  Patents 
for  an  extension.  I  informed  him,  that  inasmuch 
as  the  act  of  Congress  prescribed  the  mode 
in  which  patents  should  be  extended ;  required 
a  reasonable  notice  to  be  given  to  the  public  in 
sundry  newspapers,  published  in  those  parts 
of  the  country  most  interested  against  such  ex- 
tension; and  as  the  board  had  decided  that 
'reasonable'  notice  should  be  a  publication  of 
the  application  for  extension  three  weeks  prior 
to  the  day  appointed  for  the  hearing,  there  was 
not  time  to  give  the  required  notice  in  his 
case;  and  I  advised  Mr.  Hussey  not  to  make 
his  application,  and  thus  lose  the  fee  of  $40 
required  in  such  cases,  as  he  inevitably  would, 
without  the  least  prospect  of  succeeding  in  his 
application — but  to  petition  Congress  for  an 
extension,  which  body  had  the  power  to  grant 
it." 


"Washington,  5th  Sept.,  1854. 
"Obed  Hussey,  Esq.,  Baltimore: — 

"My  Dear  Sir:  I  have  recently  learned, 
with  surprise  and  indignation,  that  certain 
speculating  harpies  who  fill  their  coffers  with 
the  products  of  other  men's  brains,  and  who, 
in  your  case,  seek  to  'reap  where  they  sow  not' 
are  basely  and  unjustly  endeavoring  to  pre- 
vent a  renewal  of  your  patent  for  your  'Reap- 
ing and  Mowing  Machine,'  upon  the  ground 
[among  others]  that  you  and  your  agents  have 
neglected  to  press  your  Claim  properly  before 
Congress. 

"I  have  been  your  Agent  from  the  time  the 
claim  was  first  presented  to  Congress,  and 
know  that  the  Charge  is  entirely  unfounded. 

"The  facts  according  to  the  best  of  my  rec- 
ollection and  belief,  are  as  follows:  Your 
Claim  for  a  renewal  was  presented  to  Congress 
at  the  very  first  Session,  after  you  ascertained 
that  your  application  to  the  Commissioner 
could  not  be  acted  upon  under  the  rules  of  the 
Patent  Office.  Every  paper  and  proof  neces- 
sary to  establish  your  right  to  a  renewal  of 
your  patent,  under  the  existing  laws,  was  pro- 
cured, and  promptly  placed  with  your  memo- 
rial, before  Congress.  No  further  proof  was 
required  by  the  Committee  on  Patents,  in  the 
Senate,  and  your  right  to  a  renewal  was  fully 

87 


An  Able  established  by  an  able  and  unanswerable  re- 
and  port  of  that  Committee,  accompanied  by  a  bill 

Unanswerable    r  ,     _,,  .  -,-,••,-,  •    . 

R  for  a  renewal.  This  report  and  bill  were  printed 
by  order  of  the  Senate,  and  were  noticed  as  a 
part  of  the  proceedings  of  Congress,  by  the 
press  throughout  the  United  States,  and  every 
body  thus  notified  of  your  application. 

"From  that  period  to  the  present  time,  I  do 
not  think  there  has  been  a  single  Congress  at 
which  all  proper  efforts  were  not  made  to  ob- 
tain the  action  of  that  Body.  Members  were 
not  annoyed  with  indecent  importunity;  nor 
were  any  powerful  combinations  of  interested 
individuals  resorted  to,  to  force  your  Claim 
upon  the  consideration  of  Congress.  This  was 
Mr.Hussey's  not  in  accordance  with  your  taste,  or  your 
Methods  means.  I  well  remember,  however,  that  you 
frequently  visited  this  City  on  that  business; 
and  that  at  almost  every  session,  you  either 
brought  or  sent  to  me,  to  be  laid  before  Con- 
gress, some  new  evidence  of  the  triumph  of 
your  great  invention.  These  documents  were 
faithfully  laid  before  that  body,  or  sent  to  the 
senators  from  Maryland  for  that  purpose.  On 
one  occasion,  as  your  agent,  I  addressed  a 
somewhat  extended  communication  to  the  Sen- 
ators from  Maryland,  attempting  to  show  the 
vast  importance  of  your  invention  to  the  Agri- 
cultural interests  of  the  United  States,  and  the 
strong  claims  you  had  to  a  renewal  of  your 


patent,  and  requested  them  as  the  Representa- 
tives of  your  State  in  the  Senate,  to  give  their 
attention  and  influence  to  accomplish  that  end. 

"At  a  subsequent  Session,  this  request  was 
repeated,  to  one  or  both  of  the  Senators  from 
that  State. 

"I  can  also  state  with  certainty  that  hardly 
a  Session  of  Congress  has  passed  since  your 
memorial  was  first  presented,  at  which  promi- 
nent and  Scientific  Agriculturalists,  in  different 
parts  of  the  Country,  who  were  acquainted 
with  the  merits  of  your  invention,  have  not 
used  their  influence  with  Members  of  Congress 
to  obtain  a  renewal  of  your  patent.  Any  pre- 
tense, therefore,  that  your  Claim  has  not  been 
duly  presented,  notified  to  the  public,  and  urged 
with  all  proper  care  and  diligence  upon  the  at- 
tention of  Congress,  I  repeat  is  totally  un- 
founded. 

"It  will  be  a  stain  upon  the  justice  of  the 
Country,  if  one  whom  truth  and  time  must 
rank  among  its  greatest  Benefactors,  shall  be 
stricken  down  and  permitted  to  die  in  indi- 
gence by  the  interested  and  unworthy  efforts 
thus  made  to  defeat  you. 

"You  are  at  liberty  to  use  this  statement  in 
any  manner  you  may  desire. 

"Very  truly  and  respectfully, 
"Your  Ob't  Ser'vt, 

"CHA'S  E.  SHERMAN." 


Although  not  coming  in  the  natural  order 
of  events,  I  quote  from  an  enclosure  found  in 
a  letter  written  to  Hon.  H.  May,  evidently  a 
member  of  Congress.  Mr.  Hussey  having 
failed  to  apply  for  an  extension  of  his  1833 
patent  early  enough,  a  bill  was  introduced  in 
Congress  with  an  extension  in  view.  In  some 
correspondence  between  Mr.  Hussey  and  the 
Hon.  H.  May  an  enclosure  is  found  reading  as 
follows : 

"During  the  examination  of  my  case  in  the 
Committee-room  on  the  21st  inst.  you  asked 
me  a  question,  and  accompanied  it  with  a  re- 
mark to  the  effect  'Why  could  I  not  raise  a 
company  in  Baltimore  with  sufficient  capital 
and  make  as  many  machines  as  Howard  &  Co. 
and  compete  with  them  on  equal  ground?  The 
Mr.Hussey's  excitement  of  the  occasion  disqualified  me  for 
Defense  giving  a  full  reply  to  your  question  and  re- 
marks. I  was  at  the  time  so  impressed  with 
the  injustice  and  the  great  hardship  of  being 
compelled  to  compete  with  the  world  for  what 
of  right  belonged  to  myself  exclusively  that  I 
had  not  the  words  to  express  my  feelings. 
Could  any  gentleman  look  back  twenty-one 
years  and  see  me  combating  the  prejudices  of 
the  farmers,  and  exerting  the  most  intense 
labor  of  body  and  mind,  and  continuing  to  do 
so  from  year  to  year,  at  the  very  door  of  pov- 

30 


erty,  and  also  look  back  on  those  New  York 
parties  through  the  same  period,  accumulating 
wealth  by  the  usual  course  of  business,  and 
perhaps  watching  my  progress,  and  waiting 
for  the  proper  moment  to  step  in  with  their 
money  power  and  grasp  the  lion's  share  of  the 
prize  which  justly  belongs  to  myself.  If  they 
could  look  back  on  the  circumstances  and  com- 
prehend the  case  in  all  its  reality  and  truth  I 
should  have  no  fear  of  a  just  decision  by  the 
Committee  in  the  House  of  Representatives. 
The  Government  which  can  tolerate  and  up- 
hold such  a  state  of  things  would  appear  to  me 
to  be  a  hard  Government. 

"The  end  and  design  of  the  Patent  Laws 
was  to  reward  the  inventor  for  a  valuable  in- 
vention by  giving  him  the  exclusive  right  to 
make  and  vend  the  article  which  he  had  in- 
vented and  fourteen  years  was  deemed  a  suffi- 
cient time  in  which  to  secure  that  reward.  The 
telegraph  was  perfect  on  its  first  trial.  It  re- 
quired no  improvement.  On  the  contrary,  half 
the  wire  was  dispensed  with.  The  Govern- 
ment was  at  the  cost  of  trying  the  experiment 
and  has  since  heaped  wealth  on  the  inventor. 
My  fourteen  years  were  required  in  perfecting 
my  invention  without  any  return  for  time  and 
labor.  (The  finishing  touch  to  his  cutting  ap- 

31 


paratus  is,  no  doubt  here  referred  to,  and  shown 
in  his  patent  of  1847.) 

"Public  opinion  on  the  subject  of  valuable 
inventions  is  liberal  until  an  obscure  individual 
appears  in  the  community  claiming  the  reward 
for  a  valuable  invention;  the  disposition  then 
seems  to  be  to  let  him  shrink  into  a  corner. 
The  world  has  got  the  advantage  of  his  labors 
and  has  no  further  use  for  him;  every  unrea- 
sonable man  in  the  community  will  at  once 
claim  an  equal  right  with  the  inventor  of  the 
device  and  one  not  content  to  urge  their  claims 
Mr.Hussey's  j.jy  misrepresentation  but  must  heap  abuses  on 

Protest  .  111- 

the  poor  inventor  who  they  have  in  a  great 
measure  pushed  out  of  their  way.  The  idea 
that  a  wise  Government,  of  an  enlightened 
country,  can  not  only  look  on  and  suffer  such 
injustice  but  will  actually  encourage  it  by  dis- 
regarding the  prayers  of  the  poor  inventor  is  a 
mystery  to  those  who  build  their  hopes  on  the 
dogma  that  'Truth  is  mighty  and  will  prevail.' 
I  hope  the  Committee  will  not  pass  lightly  over 
my  case  but  duly  consider,  as  I  believe  they 
will,  to  whom  the  advantages  of  this  invention 
belongs,  whether  to  me  or  to  the  parties  in 
New  York.  My  chief  aim  in  addressing  this 
to  you  is  to  endeavor  to  draw  a  parallel  be- 
tween myself  and  the  parties  in  New  York,  and 
thereby  secure  your  good  opinion  in  my  favor." 


Edward  Stabler,  on  January  11,  1854,  wrote 
to  Hon.  Henry  May  as  follows : 

"As  requested  I  have  examined  the  peti-  Farmer* 
tions  of  the  450  farmers  who  advocate  the  ex-  **sm* 

Hussey 

tension  of  Hussey's  patent  and  from  a  personal  Reaper 
acquaintance  or  by  character  with  much  larger 
portion  in  Delaware,  Maryland,  Virginia,  and 
North  Carolina,  and  on  reliable  information  of 
those  from  New  York — 234  in  number — I  am 
satisfied  that  they  are  wheat-growers  to  an 
amount  of  not  less  than  from  four  to  500,000 
bushels  annually.  *  *  *  They  used  Hus- 
sey's reaper,  and  some  of  them  three  and  four, 
or  more  of  these  great  labor-saving  imple- 
ments." 

Mr.  Edward  Stabler  writes  to  Henry  May, 
under  date  March  19,  1854: 

"The  most  that  I  fear  is  that  Hussey's  in- 
terests (which  all  appear  willing  to  admit  is  a 
meritorious  case)  may  suffer  in  the  contests 
that  I  am  satisfied  will  take  place  with  regard 
to  Moore  &  Haskell's  and  McCormick's  ex- 
tensions. I  should  be  greatly  pleased,  and  have 
stronger  hopes  if  Hussey's  case  could  be  acted 
on  promptly  and  before  that  contest  begins. 

"On  the  ground  of  its  having  been  so  long 
and  so  favorably  reported  on,  by  the  Senate's 
Committee  in  '48 — six  years  next  May,  possi- 
bly it  could  be  called  up  at  an  earlier  date, — 
the  sooner  the  better,  to  avoid  competition 

33 


from  interested  parties,  and  which  I  certainly 
anticipate  if  long  delayed  in  either  House  of 
Congress.  Honestly  believing  the  cause  just 
and  right,  for  no  fee,  however  large,  could 
tempt  me  to  advocate  what  I  thought  unjust 
or  wrong,  I  shall  persevere  as  long  as  there  is 
ground  for  hope.  If  we  fail  I  shall  have  pleas- 
ing reflections,  doing  unto  others  as  you  would 
that  they  under  similar  circumstances  should 
do  unto  you." 

Mr.  Edward  Stabler,  on  February  5,  1854, 
wrote  to  J.  A.  Pierce,  member  of  one  of  the 
Committees,  a  letter  from  which  the  following 
is  extracted: 

Mr.Hussey's         "I  will,  however,  preface  my  remarks  by 
Character  saymg  that  I  have  no  connection  whatever  with 

and  Service   ....  . .  .    , 

his  business  operations  nor  pecuniary  interest 
in  his  affairs,  but  being  well  acquainted  with 
him  I  am  free  to  say,  that  I  have  known  no 
man  on  whose  word  I  have  placed  more  im- 
plicit reliance,  no  one  more  honestly  entitled 
to  what  he  asks  for. 

"He  has  faithfully  devoted  the  prime  of 
his  life,  and  no  small  portion  of  it  either,  in 
the  invention  and  the  perfecting  of  the  reaping 
and  mowing  machine;  and  his  untiring  perse- 
verance has  certainly  been  crowned  with  suc- 
cess so  far  as  to  confer  a  signal  and  lasting 
benefit  on  his  country;  but  unfortunately  he 
34 


has  derived  no  corresponding  advantage  for 
himself,  and  from  no  fault  on  his  part. 

"While  C.  H.  McCormick  has  literally  fat-  Opinion  of 

tened  on  the  agricultural  public  by  the  sale  of  * "       e. 

,  .  Mechanic 

his  inferior  and  cheaply  made  machines — for 
such  I  do  consider  them,  both  from  my  own 
observations  and  the  report  to  me  by  those 
who  have  been  induced  to  purchase  them — 
Hussey  has  been  pirated  on  from  all  quarters, 
and  others  reaping  the  reward  of  his  labors. 
And  I  perceive  by  the  papers  on  file,  and  ac- 
companying the  printed  report  (No.  16) 
that  this  same  C.  H.  McCormick  has  actually 
petitioned  against  the  renewal  of  Hussey's  pat- 
ent. It  is  really  a  very  hard  case,  that  a  poor 
man  and  one  of  the  most  deserving  in  the  com- 
munity in  every  sense  of  the  term,  should  thus 
fail  of  a  just  reward  when  he  has  done  so  much 
for  the  benefit  of  others.  *  *  *  Believing 
as  I  do  that  the  extension  is  no  more  than 
sheer  justice  to  Obed  Hussey, — quite  equal  in 
merit  to  any  that  has  been  granted, — as  one  of 
the  most  meritorious  in  the  language  of  the 
Committee,  I  do  most  earnestly  solicit  thy  kind 
aid  and  influence  to  get  it  through  the  Senate. 
*  *  *  He  was  then  (and  still  is)  a  compar- 
atively poor  man ;  without  the  means  from  his 
limited  sales  to  extend  his  business  in  a  profit-  Mr- 
able  manner  or  to  protect  his  known  and  ac-  Stablers 

Testimony 

knowledged  rights  from  the  depredations  of 

35 


others.  His  shops — and  I  speak  from  personal 
knowledge — are  for  the  most  part  dilapidated 
sheds — too  confined  and  cramped  up  to  do  any 
part  of  his  work  to  the  best  advantage,  and 
from  a  personal  knowledge  speaking  as  a  prac- 
tical machinist  of  some  25  years  experience,  I 
do  know  that  his  profits  are  far  less  than  some 
other  machine  makers — not  the  half  of  what  is 
usually  supposed. 

"Take,  for  example,  the  machines  as  usually 
made  by  Obed  Hussey  and  C.  H.  McCormick — 
for  I  am  familiar  with  both ;  owing  to  the  qual- 
ity of  the  work,  costs  of  material  and  arrange- 
ment of  the  mechanism,  two  of  McCormick's 
The  Two  can  j.je  ma(je  by  him  for  little  or  no  more  than 

ConT  ared    t^1C  C°St  tO  **USSev  °*  one  °*  *"s-     Such,  tOO,  IS 

the  statement  on  oath  of  competent  men  em- 
ployed by  both  manufacturers.  McCormick's 
foreman  and  clerk  have  sworn  (see  petition 
from  New  York  against  his  extension)  that  his 
machines  are  made  for  some  $35  to  $40  each. 
Any  man  who  will  undertake  to  make  and  sell 
Hussey  machines  as  he  makes  them  for  much 
less  than  double  this  sum,  will  soon  beg  his 
bread  if  he  depends  on  his  profits  to  buy  it, 
unless  he  cheats  his  hands  out  of  their  part." 

A  postscript  is  added,  which  reads : 
"I  should  have  made  no  allusion  to  C.  H. 
McCormick  or  to  his  machines,  had  he  not 

36 


volunteered  by  petition  to  injure  his  rival — in 
my  opinion  a  most  worthy,  reliable  and  de- 
serving man — and  I  would  add  that  in  my  es- 
timation the  two  machines  differ  just  about  as 
widely  as  the  two  men." 

We  may  assume  that  Mr.  Hussey  must 
have  begun  on  his  large  machine  late  in  1832, 
or  early  in  1833,  at  latest.  During  the  early 
part  of  the  harvest  of  1833  he  was  in  the  field. 
"The  machine  was  started,"  Stabler  tells  us, 
"but  owing  to  some  part  giving  way,  or  some 
slight  defect  not  apparent  until  then,  it  at  first 
failed  to  work  satisfactorily.  One  burly  fellow 
present  picked  up  a  reaping  cradle  and,  swing- 
ing it  with  an  air  of  great  exultation,  exclaimed, 
This  is  the  machine  to  cut  the  wheat !' "  An- 
other account  charges  the  breakage  to  a  frac- 
tious team. 

"After  the  jeers  and  merriment  of  the  crowd  Mr.Hussey's 
had  somewhat  subsided,  the  inventor  remedied  TriumPh 
the  defect,  and  assisted  by  the  laborers  present 
— the  horses  having  been  removed — pulled  the 
machine  to  the  top  of  an  adjacent  hill;  when, 
alone,  he  drew  the  machine  down  the  hill  and 
through  the  standing  grain,  when  it  cut  every 
head  clean  in  its  track.     The  same  machine 
was  directly  afterwards  exhibited  before  the 
Hamilton   County   Agricultural   Society   near 
Carthage,  on  the  2nd  day  of  July,  1833." 
37 


The  secretary  of  the  Society  wrote  an  ex- 
ceedingly favorable  report.  The  group  of  spec- 
tators present  at  this  trial  drew  up  a  testi- 
monial that  was  very  favorable  indeed.  On 
July  2,  1833,  then,  we  are  warranted  in  saying, 
the  problem  that  had  so  long  exercised  the 
minds  of  inventors  was  solved. 

Fortunately  Mr.  Hussey  was  not  as  easily 
discouraged  as  many.  He,  no  doubt,  felt  cha- 
grined that  his  machine  had  broken  down,  but 
had  the  pluck  then  and  there  to  make  an  effort 
to  close  the  hooting  mouths,  and  fully  suc- 
ceeded. In  1834  other  machines  were  put  out. 
We  learn  from  the  Genesee  Farmer,  dated 
December  6,  1834,  that  Mr.  Hussey,  the  in- 
ventor of  a  machine  for  harvesting  wheat,  had 
left  in  the  village  one  of  his  machines  for  the 
purpose  of  giving  the  farmers  an  opportunity 
to  test  its  value.  During  the  harvest  of  1834 
it  was  operated  in  the  presence  of  hundreds  of 
The  Hussey  farmers  with  most  satisfactory  results.  We 

next  find  Mr* Hussev  at  Palmyra,  Mo-» on  July 

6,  1835,  with  two  of  his  machines,  at  the  farm 
of  his  old  friend,  Edwin  G.  Pratt.  The  machine 
"excited  much  attention,  and  its  performance 
was  highly  satisfactory."  The  results  of  the 
trials  were  published  in  the  "Missouri  Cour- 
rier"  in  August  or  September  of  1835.  The 
machines  were  sold  for  $150  each.  A  Mr. 
Muldrow  bought  another  kind  of  machine, 

38 


however,  in  which  the  cutting  was  done  by  a 
"whirling  wheel"  and  paid  $500  for  it.  In  1836 
Mr.  Hussey  was  in  Maryland,  at  the  written 
solicitation  of  the  Board  of  Trustees  of  the 
Maryland  Agricultural  Society.  The  fame  of 
his  reaping  machines  in  the  state  of  New  York, 
and  the  far  West,  had  spread,  "though  with 
something  like  a  snail's  pace,"  as  new  things 
did  two-thirds  of  a  century  ago.  The  machine 
was  operated  at  Oxford,  Talbot  County,  on  the 
1st  of  July,  in  the  presence  of  the  Board  and 
a  considerable  number  of  other  gentlemen.  Its 
performance  was  perfect,  as  it  cut  every  spear  Public 
of  grain,  collected  it  in  bunches  of  the  proper  Tests 
size  for  sheaves  and  laid  it  straight  and  even 
for  the  binder.  On  the  12th  of  July  a  public 
exhibition  was  made  at  Easton,  under  the  direc- 
tion of  the  Board;  several  hundred  persons, 
principally  farmers,  being  present.  This  same 
machine  was  sold  to  Mr.  Tench  Tilghman,  for 
whom  it  cut  180  acres  of  wheat,  oats  and  barley 
during  that  season.  The  report  of  the  Board 
of  Trustees  of  the  Maryland  Agricultural  So- 
ciety stated  that  "three  mules  of  medium  size 
worked  in  it  constantly  with  as  much  ease  as  in 
a  drag  harrow.  They  moved  with  equal  facil- 
ity in  a  walk  or  trot."  In  1837  the  machines 
were  sold  in  various  parts  of  the  country.  One 
at  Hornewood,  Md.,  one  at  West  River,  and 
several  others  throughout  the  state.  One  of 

39 


the  machines  sold  in  1838  to  the  St.  George's 
and  Appoquinomick  Ag.  Society  cut  several 
hundred  acres  of  grain,  up  to  1845,  and  was 
then  in  good  repair.  In  all  this  time  the  cost 
for  repairs  was  only  l%c  per  acre.  The  popu- 
larity of  the  machine  became  so  pronounced 
that  other  inventors  were  given  courage,  and 
those  who  before  had  failed  were  prompted  to 
pick  up  their  work  where  they  had  dropped  it 
or  begin  on  newer  lines. 

In  1843  we  find  that  Hussey's  machine  was 
in  a  field-contest  with  one  brought  in  by  Cyrus 
H.  McCormick  of  Rockbridge  County,  Va.  We 
say  brought  in,  because  the  claim  that  it  was 
in  fact  invented  and  made  by  Robert  McCor- 
mick seems  to  be  quite  well  founded.  (Memo- 
rial of  Robert  McCormick.)  The  contest  took 
place  on  the  farm  of  a  Mr.  Hutchinson,  about 
four  miles  above  the  city  of  Richmond.  Mr. 
Hussey  had,  for  a  number  of  years,  been  build- 
ing two  sizes  of  machines,  and  at  the  first  day's 
A  Hnssey-  trial  was  obliged  to  use  a  small  one  because 
McCormick  hjs  only  large  machine  within  reach  was  else- 
00  es  where  occupied.  The  majority  of  the  self- 
appointed  committee  of  bystanders  reported  in 
favor  of  McCormick's  machine,  but  Mr.  Roane, 
one  of  them,  who  signed  very  reluctantly,  later 
bought  a  Hussey  machine.  A  few  days  after, 
at  Tree  Hill,  Mr.  Hussey  was  present  with  his 
large  machine. 

40 


In  the  "American  Farmer"  was  soon  after 
published  a  letter  from  Mr.  Roane,  dated  Jan- 
uary 23,  1844,  to  Mr.  Hussey,  in  which,  among 
other  things,  he  says: 

"Averse  as  I  am  to  having  my  name  in 
print  on  this,  or  any  other  occasion,  I  cannot 
with  propriety  decline  a  response  to  your  in- 
quiry. I  had  never  seen  or  formed  an  idea  of  a 
reaping  machine  until  I  went  to  Hutchinson's. 
I  was  surprised  and  delighted  with  the  per- 
formance of  each  of  them,  and  fully  resolved 
to  own  one  of  them  by  the  next  harvest,  but 
their  performance  that  day  left  me  in  a  state 
of  doubt  which  I  should  select.  The  report 
spoke  in  terms  of  high  praise  of  each  machine, 
and  I  consented  to  its  award,  that  on  the  whole 
Mr.  McCormick's  was  preferable,  merely  be- 
cause being  the  cheapest,  and  requiring  but  two 
horses,  it  would  best  suit  the  majority  of  our 
farmers,  who  make  small  crops  of  wheat  on 
weak  land,  for  I  doubted  its  capacity  in  heavy 
grain.  After  this  report  was  made  I  heard 
your  complaint  that  you  did  not  have  a  fair 
trial,  because  being  unable  to  bring  into  the 
field  your  large  improved  reaper,  which  was  up 
the  river,  you  were  compelled  to  comply  with 
your  engagement  for  the  day,  with  a  small  and  Mr.  Roane's 
inferior  machine,  drawn  by  an  indifferent  and  Letter 
untutored  team.  Mr.  Hutchinson's  wheat  was 
badly  rusted,  and  therefore  light.  I  had  ready 

41 


for  the  scythe  a  low  ground  field  of  heavy  and 
well  matured  grain;  partly  to  expedite  my 
harvest  work,  and  partly  to  renew  the  trial, 
that  I  might  solve  my  doubts  as  to  the  merits 
of  these  machines,  I  succeeded  in  engaging 
them  to  be  at  Tree  Hill  on  a  named  day.  They 
both  came  agreeable  to  appointment,  Mr.  Mc- 
Cormick  bringing  the  machine  he  used  at 
Hutchinson's,  and  you  bringing  the  one  you 
could  not  on  that  occasion  bring  down  the 
river.  The  day  was  fine,  and  both  machines 
did  their  best,  and  had  a  very  fair  trial.  My 
doubts  were  fully  removed,  and  my  mind  con- 
vinced that  in  the  heavy  wheat  we  raise  on  our 
river  low  grounds,  rich  bottoms,  etc.  your  ma- 
chine is  superior  to  Mr.  McCormick's  of  which 
I  still  think  highly.  I  accordingly  ordered  one 
of  yours  to  be  made  for  the  approaching  har- 
vest. 

"I  wish  you  all  possible  success  in  cutting 
hemp  in  the  'Great  West.'  It  must  be  very  de- 
sirable to  cut  that  valuable  plant  instead  of 
pulling  it  up  by  the  roots,  and  I  cannot  doubt 
that  your  reaper  has  ample  power  for  the  pur- 
pose." (Records  of  U.  S.  Patent  Office.) 

Mr.  Hussey         No  one  will  claim  that  Mr.  Hussey  was 

Not  a  what  may  be  termed  a  good  business  man  ; 

Business  jj^e  most  inventors,  his  mind  was  on  what  he 


sought  to  accomplish  rather  than  on  the  hoard- 
42 


ing  of  weath.  I  have  already  quoted  from  cor- 
respondence that  passed  between  him  and  his 
friends,  when  attempting  to  get  his  1833  patent 
extended. 

An  early  manufacturer,  well  known  to  Mr. 
Hussey  and  who  paid  royalties  under  Mr.  Hus- 
sey's  patents,  writes : 

"Mr.  Hussey's  early  machines  were  made 
by  Jarvis  Reynolds  of  Cincinnati,  Ohio,"  we 
are  informed  by  Mr.  William  N.  Whitely,  who 
early  became  familiar  with  many  of  the  facts, 
he  having  opposed  Hussey's  extension  applica- 
tion, "in  a  shop  on  the  river  front,  beginning  in 
1831  or  '32.  After  making  that  operated  in 
1833  he  built  several  others  during  two  or  three 
years  or  more.  Some  of  the  early  ones  were 
taken  to  Glendale,  Ohio,  to  the  farm  of  Alger- 
non Foster." 

"The  first  machine  taken  there  had  a  reel  on 
it,  but  after  using  it  a  short  time  the  reel  was 
laid  aside.  On  the  same  machine  was  an  extra 
platform,  attached  to  the  rear,  so  that  the  raker 
could  deliver  the  grain  to  one  side.  The  ma- 
chines were  intended  for  both  reaping  and 
mowing."  Mr.  Whitely  states  that  he  saw  two 
of  the  machines  still  on  Mr.  Foster's  farm  in 
1860,  that  had  been  there  since,  probably,  1835. 

"The  machines  were  at  first  bought  by 
farmers  who  did  cutting  for  the  neighbors  and 
under  the  circumstances  were  anxious  to  pros- 

43 


trate  as  many  acres  of  grain  per  day  as  possi- 
ble; in  order  to  accomplish  this,  they  applied 
four  horses  and  moved  on  a  'jog  trot.'  So  mov- 
ing the  reel  was  found  of  little  service  because 
the  rapidly  moving  machine  caused  the  sev- 
ered straws  to  fall  backward  on  the  platform  so 
that  the  raker  had  little  to  do  but  to  remove  it, 
except  where  it  was  particularly  badly  lodged ; 
in  such  cases  he  manipulated  his  rake  as  it  is 
now  used  on  all  reelless  reaping  machines." 

After  building  the  machines  for  Algernon 
Foster,  Mr.  Hussey  undertook  the  manufac- 
ture of  two  or  more  machines  for  the  harvest 
of  1835.  From  a  letter  received  from  John 
Lane,  we  quote: 

"  'Old  Judge  Foster'  was  a  well  known  jur- 
ist and  judge  of  court  in  Hamilton  County, 
Ohio,  having  his  country  home  (a  farm)  3J4 
miles  near  due  east  from  my  father's  place  of 
business,  and  it  was  he  who  introduced  Obed 
Hussey  to  John  Lane  as  being  a  mechanic  who 
could  and  would  make  for  him  the  reaper  he 
A  Contract  was  at  that  time  seeking  to  have  made  in  Cin- 
cinnati. Also  it  was  agreed  between  said  Hus- 
sey and  Foster  that  when  said  reaper  had  been 
made  and  tested  to  their  satisfaction  in  the 
standing  grains,  his  sons,  Algernon  and  brother 
(whose  name  I  do  not  remember)  would  pay 

44 


all  costs  of  making  said  reaper  and  put  the 
same  in  use  to  best  of  their  ability." 

I  quote  from  the  book  entitled  "Valley  of 
the  Upper  Wabash,  Indiana,"  published  by 
Henry  Ellsworth  in  1838 : 

"Another  material  reduction  of  the  expense 
attending  the  cultivation  of  hay  and  other 
crops  will  be  found  in  the  use  of  some  of  the 
mowing  and  reaping  machines  recently  in- 
vented. 

"A  machine  of  this  description,  invented  by  Editorial 
Mr.  Obed  Hussey,  of  Cambridge,  Maryland,  Comment 
has  of  late  excited  general  admiration,  from  the 
neatness  and  rapidity  of  its  execution,  and  the 
great  amount  of  labor  which  its  use  will  save. 
Its  introduction  on  large  farms,  of  the  descrip- 
tion we  have  mentioned,  will  undoubtedly  be 
followed  by  remarkable  results.  These  ma- 
chines, when  in  good  order  (and  they  seldom 
need  repair),  can  cut  from  twelve  to  fifteen 
acres  of  grass,  and  from  fifteen  to  twenty  acres 
of  wheat,  daily. 

"The  following  letter  from  John  Stone- 
braker,  Esq.,  of  Hagerstown,  Maryland,  will 
exhibit  his  experience  in  the  use  of  this  ma- 
chine. 

"He  was  induced  (as  the  writer  knows  from 
personal  communication  with  him  on  the  sub- 
ject) to  try  it  from  the  representations  of 

45 


others,  and  with  many  misgivings  as  to  the  re- 
sult. That  trial,  however,  has  satisfied  him  and 
with  him,  many  of  his  neighbors,  of  the  great 
utility  of  the  machine. 

"The  letter  is  as  follows : 

"  'Hagerstown,  August  15,  1837. 

"'Dear  Sir:  Will  you  please  give  this  a 
place  in  your  paper,  for  the  benefit  of  wheat 
growers.  As  the  subject  is  of  public  interest, 
it  is  hoped  that  other  papers  will  circulate  it 
through  the  grain  growing  districts  of  the 
country. 

"  'I  procured  a  reaping  machine  this  sum- 
mer of  Mr.  Hussey,  the  inventor,  which  I  have 
used  through  my  wheat  harvest.  It  was  in  con- 
stant use  every  day,  and  performed  its  work  to 
my  satisfaction,  and  far  better  than  I  had  any 
expectation  of  when  I  first  engaged  it  of  Mr. 
Hussey.  When  the  ground  is  clear  of  rocks, 
A  Hussey  loose  stones,  stumps,  etc.,  and  the  grain  stands 
Testimonial  well,  it  cuts  it  perfectly  clear,  taking  every 
head ;  and,  if  well  managed,  scatters  none,  but 
leaves  it  in  neat  heaps  ready  for  binding. 
When  the  grain  is  flat  down,  the  machine  will 
of  course  pass  over  it;  but  if  it  be  leaning,  or 
tangled  only,  it  is  cut  nearly  as  well  as  if  stand- 
ing, excepting  when  it  leans  from  the  machine, 
and  then  if  the  horses  are  put  in  a  trot  it  will 
be  very  well  cut.  But  in  cutting  such  grain 

46 


much  depends  on  the  expertness  of  the  hand 
who  pushes  off  the  grain,  in  making  clean  work 
and  good  sheaves.  I  found  the  machine  capa- 
ble of  going  through  anything  growing  on  my 
wheat  land,  such  as  weeds  and  grass,  no  mat- 
ter how  thick. 

"  'After  my  harvest  was  over,  I  cut  my  seed 
timothy  with  the  same  neatness  and  ease  that 
I  did  my  grain.  As  respects  the  durability  of 
the  machine,  I  can  say  this  much  for  my  ma- 
chine, that  not  the  least  thing  has  given  out 
yet;  it  appears  as  strong  as  a  cart,  and  but 
little  liable  to  get  out  of  order,  if  well  used.  I 
was  advised  by  Mr.  Hussey  of  the  necessity  of 
keeping  some  of  the  parts  well  greased ;  this  I 
have  punctually  attended  to,  and  no  perceptible 
wear  yet  appears,  beyond  the  ordinary  wear  of 
any  other  machinery. 

"  'It  is  immaterial  to  the  machine  whether 
the  speed  be  a  walk,  or  trot;  although  a  walk 
will  make  the  most  perfect  work.  My  speed 
was  a  common  walk,  but  a  trot  is  sometimes 
necessary  to  counteract  the  effect  of  a  strong 
wind  when  blowing  from  behind,  in  order  to 
incline  the  grain  backwards,  on  to  the  platform, 
to  make  good  bundles.  A  quick  walk  is  re- 
quired to  make  good  work  in  very  short  and 
scattering  grain.  The  machine  performs  well,  Durablll*y 
up  or  down  hill,  provided  the  surface  be  not  °  ^ine 
too  broken.  By  its  compactness  and  ease  of 

47 


management,  rocks,  and  stumps  too  high  to  be 
cut  over,  can  be  easily  avoided.  Although  a 
rough  surface  is  very  objectionable,  yet  I  have 
cut  over  very  rocky  ground  with  no  material 
difficulty.  I  can  say  one  thing  which  to  some 
may  appear  incredible,  but  it  is  not  the  less 
true;  the  cutters  of  my  machine  have  not  been 
sharpened  since  I  have  had  it;  nor  have  I  yet 
seen  any  appearance  of  a  need  of  it  in  the  qual- 
ity of  its  wor*c.  How  many  harvests  a  machine 
would  cut  without  sharpening  is  hard  to  say. 
I  propose  sharpening  mine  once  a  year  only. 
I  have  used  two  horses  at  a  time  in  the  ma- 
chine, and  sometimes  changed  at  noon;  they 
worked  it  with  ease,  the  draught  being  light. 
I  took  no  account  of  what  I  cut  in  any  one 
day,  with  this  exception:  in  less  than  half  a 
day  I  cut  six  acres,  and  was  often  detained  for 
want  of  the  requisite  number  of  binders,  by 
which  much  time  was  lost.  My  machine  being 
something  narrower  than  those  generally  made 
by  Mr.  Hussey,  I  could  cut  but  about  one  acre 
in  going  two  miles;  this,  at  the  moderate  gait 
of  two  and  a  half  miles  per  hour,  would  amount 
to  twelve  and  a  half  acres  in  ten  hours ;  and  at 
four  miles  per  hour,  a  speed  at  which  the  work 
is  done  in  fine  style,  the  amount  would  be 
twenty  acres  in  ten  hours.  I  should  judge  my 
quantity  per  day  to  range  between  ten  and  fif- 
teen acres,  yet  I  am  decided  in  the  opinion  that 

48 


I  can  cut  twenty  acres  in  a  day,  of  good  grain, 
on  good  ground,  by  the  usual  diligence  of 
harvest  hands,  with  a  little  increase  of  my 
usual  speed,  and  a  change  of  horses.  Two 
hands  are  required  to  work  the  machine,  a 
man  to  push  off  the  grain  and  a  boy  to  drive, 
besides  a  number  of  binders,  proportioned  to 
the  quantity  cut.  As  the  machine  can  be 
drawn  equally  fast  in  heavy  or  light  grain,  the 
number  of  binders  is  necessarily  increased  in 
heavy  grain,  except  an  additional  speed  be 
given  in  light  grain.  Under  every  circumstance, 
the  number  of  binders  will  vary  from  four  to 
ten;  and,  when  the  usual  care  is  practiced  by 
the  binders,  there  will  be  much  less  waste  than 
in  any  other  method  of  cutting. 

"  'I  speak  with  more  confidence  of  the 
merits  and  capacity  of  Mr.  Hussey's  reaping 
machine,  from  the  circumstance  of  having 
pushed  the  grain  off  myself  for  several  days, 
in  order  to  make  myself  practically  and  thor- 
oughly acquainted  with  it,  before  putting  it 
into  the  hands  of  my  laboring  men.  The  land 
in  this  country  being  rather  rocky  and  uneven, 
it  is  hard  to  say  what  may  be  the  ultimate  ad- 
vantage of  these  machines  to  our  farmers ;  but  A  Labor- 
from  what  little  experience  I  have  had,  I  am  Savin6 
resolved  not  to  be  without  one  or  two  of  them. 
I  can  therefore  recommend  the  machine  with 

49 


confidence,  especially  to  those  who  have  a 
large  proportion  of  smooth  ground  in  cultiva- 
tion. It  is  undoubtedly  a  labor  saving  ma- 
chine, and  worthy  of  their  attention. 

'JOHN  STONEBRAKER. 
'Mr.  Bell,  Editor  of  the  Torch  Light.' 

"To  this  testimonial  from  one  of  the  best 
and  most  practical  farmers  in  Maryland  could 
be  added  many  more,  should  they  be  needed. 
Farther  improvements  on  the  part  of  the  in- 
ventor, during  the  past  year,  have  much  in- 
creased the  power  of  the  machine;  and  its 
adoption,  as  a  valuable  agricultural  implement, 
is  becoming  very  general. 

Other  "One  of  these  machines  is  now  in  the  pos- 
Testimonials  session  of  the  writer,  which  arrived  too  late  for 
use  during  the  harvest  of  the  present  season. 
From  one  or  two  trials,  however,  and  those  un- 
der the  disadvantageous  circumstances  of  ar- 
ranging a  new  machine,  and  the  forced  selec- 
tion of  a  spot  little  suited  for  experiment,  no 
doubt  remains  of  the  result. 

"We  add  a  letter  to  the  inventor  from  Colo- 
nel Tilghmann,  who  also  resides  near  Hagers- 
town,  Maryland. 

"'September  15,  1837. 

"  'Sir :  Your  wheat  cutting  machine  was 
used  by  me  in  securing  my  clover  seed.  With 
one  man,  three  boys,  and  two  horses,  we  cut 

50 


about  twelve  acres  per  day.  The  operation 
was  in  every  respect  complete.  The  clover  was 
well  cut,  and  deposited  in  proper  sized  heaps, 
and  no  raking  required,  further  than  to  remove 
the  heaps  of  cut  clover  from  the  track  of  the 
machine.  The  whole  operation  was  easily  per- 
formed by  the  hands  and  the  horses. 

"  'In  the  operation  of  cutting  wheat,  I  fol- 
lowed the  machine  for  two  hours  in  the  field  of 
Mr.  John  Stonebraker,  during  the  late  wheat 
harvest,  and  can  vouch  for  the  operation  in 
securing  his  wheat  in  the  manner  described  in 
his  publication.  The  late  improvements  made 
by  you  in  your  machine  have  added  greatly  to 
the  beauty  and  facility  of  its  operation. 
'Yours  respectfully, 

'F.  TILGHMANN.' 
'Mr.  Hussey.' 

"We  add  the  following  notice  of  this  ma- 
chine, from  Messrs.  S.  and  E.  P.  Le  Compte, 
enterprising  farmers,  of  Cambridge,  Mary- 
land, as  follows: 

"  'Cambridge,  July  3,  1838. 
"  'We  have  employed  Mr.  Obed  Hussey's 
wheat  cutting  machine  to  cut  for  us  about 
thirty-four  acres;  the  greater  part  of  which 
was  very  heavy.  We  were  remarkably  well 
pleased  with  the  performance  of  said  machine, 
and  are  of  opinion  that,  with  proper  manage- 

51 


ment  and  attention,  it  will  cut  twenty  acres 
per  day,  and  save  it  much  better  than  any 
other  mode  of  cutting  we  have  ever  tried. 

"  'S.  &  E.  P.  LE  COMPTE.' 

"To  which  is  appended  the  following  post- 
script : 

"  'I  have  been  a  practical  farmer  forty 
years;  and  am  well  satisfied,  that,  on  a  large 
farm,  this  machine  will  save  wheat  enough, 
beyond  the  scythe  and  hooks,  to  pay  all  the  ex- 
pense of  cutting  and  binding. 

"'SAMUEL  LE  COMPTE.'" 

I  next  quoted  again  from  the  "Valley  of  the 
Upper  Wabash,  Indiana:" 

HUSSEY'S  GRAIN   CUTTER 

"Report  of  the  Board  of  Trustees  of  'The 
Maryland  Agricultural  Society,'  for  the  East- 
ern Shore,  on  the  machine  for  harvesting  small 
grain,  invented  by  Mr.  Obed  Hussey,  of  Cin- 
cinnati, Ohio. 

Invitation  of  "The  favorable  accounts  of  the  operation  of 
Agricultural  this  impiement  in  several  of  the  Western 
States,  induced  the  board  to  invite  Mr.  Hussey 
to  bring  it  to  Maryland,  and  submit  it  to  their 
inspection.  It  was  accordingly  exhibited  in 
Oxford,  Talbot  county,  on  the  first  of  July,  in 
presence  of  the  board,  and  a  considerable  num- 


her  of  other  gentlemen.  Its  performance  may 
justly  be  denominated  perfect,  as  it  cuts  every 
spear  of  grain,  collects  it  in  bunches  of  the 
proper  size  for  sheaves,  and  lays  it  straight  and 
even  for  the  binders.  On  the  12th  of  July  a 
public  exhibition  was  made  at  Easton,  under 
the  direction  of  the  board;  several  hundred 
persons,  principally  farmers,  assembled  to  wit- 
ness it,  and  expressed  themselves  highly  satis- 
fied with  the  result.  At  the  Trappe,  where  it 
was  shown  by  the  inventor  on  the  following 
Saturday,  an  equal  degree  of  approbation  was 
evinced.  It  was  afterwards  used  on  the  farm 
of  Mr.  Tench  Tilghman,  where  180  acres  of 
wheat,  oats,  and  barley  were  cut  with  it. 
Three  mules  of  medium  size  worked  in  it  con- 
stantly, with  as  much  ease  as  in  a  drag  har- 
row. They  moved  with  equal  facility  in  a 
walk  or  a  trot.  A  concise  description  of  this 
simple  implement  will  show  that  it  is  admir- 
ably adapted  to  the  important  purpose  for 
which  it  was  invented.  Resting  on  two  wheels, 
which  are  permanently  attached  to  the  ma- 
chine, and  impart  the  motion  to  the  whole,  the 
main  body  of  the  machine  is  drawn  by  the 
horses  along  the  outer  edge  of  the  standing 
grain.  As  the  horses  travel  outside  of  the 
grain,  it  is  neither  knocked  down  or  tangled  in 
the  slightest  degree.  Behind  the  wheels  is  a 
platform  (supported  by  a  roller  or  wheel), 

53 


which  projects  beyond  the  side  of  the  machine 
five  feet  into  the  grain.  On  the  front  of  the 
edge  projecting  part  of  the  platform  is  the  cut- 
ter. This  is  composed  of  twenty-one  teeth,  re- 
Bow  the  sembling  large  lancet  blades,  which  are  placed 

Reaper  si<je  by  side,  and  firmly  riveted  to  a  rod  of  iron. 

Worked  ^  lateral  motion  is  imparted  to  it  by  a  crank, 
causing  it  to  vibrate  between  two  rows  of  iron 
spikes,  which  point  forward.  As  the  machine 
advances,  the  grain  is  cut  and  falls  backwards 
on  the  platform,  where  it  collects  in  a  pile.  A 
man  is  placed  on  the  part  of  the  platform  di- 
rectly behind  the  horses,  and  with  a  rake  of 
peculiar  construction  pushes  off  the  grain  in 
separate  bunches,  each  bunch  making  a  sheaf. 
It  may  appear  to  some  that  the  grain  will  ac- 
cumulate too  rapidly  for  this  man  to  perform 
his  duty.  But,  upon  considering  the  difference 
between  the  space  occupied  by  the  grain  when 
standing,  and  when  lying  in  a  pile  after  it  is 
cut,  it  will  be  evident  that  the  raker  has  ample 
time  to  push  off  the  bunches  even  in  the 
thickest  grain.  In  thin  grain  he  has  to  wait 
until  sufficient  has  collected  to  form  a  sheaf. 

"The  machine  is  driven  around  the  grain, 
which  may  be  sown  either  on  a  smooth  surface 
or  on  corn  ridges.  For  the  first  round  a  way 
may  be  cleared  with  a  cradle;  but  this  is 
deemed  unnecessary,  for  the  grain,  when 
driven  over,  is  left  in  an  inclined  position,  and 

54 


by  cutting  it  in  the  opposite  direction  as  much 
of  it  is  saved  as  with  a  cradle.  Fourteen  acres 
in  corn  lands  were  cut  between  10  A.  M.  and 
Ty?.  P.  M.  The  hands  had  never  worked  with 
the  machine  before,  nor  was  it  a  trial  day's 
work ;  for,  owing  to  the  shortness  of  the  straw, 
the  machine  was  not  allowed  to  cut  when  pass- 
ing over  the  ridges  from  one  side  of  the  ground 
to  the  other,  and  this  time  was  consequently 
lost.  From  the  principle  on  which  the  cutting 
is  performed,  a  keen  edge  to  the  cutter  is  by 
no  means  essential.  The  toughest  weeds,  an 
occasional  corn  stalk,  or  a  stick  of  the  thick- 
ness of  a  man's  little  finger,  have  been  fre- 
quently cut  without  at  all  affecting  its  opera- 
tion; it  can  be  sharpened,  however,  in  a  few 
minutes  with  a  file.  The  width  of  the  swath 
may  be  increased  by  having  the  cutter  made 
longer,  and  the  same  machine  will  cut  a  stub- 
ble of  several  different  heights. 

"There  is  ample  room  to  make  the  different 
parts  of  any  size,  though  the  strength  of  every 
part  has  been  fully  tested.  The  machine  has 
been  often  choked  by  oyster-shells  getting  into 
the  cutter,  in  attempting  to  cut  too  low  a  stub- 
ble. The  motion  of  the  machinery  being 
checked,  the  main  wheels  slide  on  the  ground; 
the  strain  on  every  part  being  equal  to  the  Mr-  Hnssey 
power  exerted  by  the  horses.  It  can  be  man-  ^?* 
aged  by  any  intelligent,  careful  negro.  We 
£5 


deem  it  a  simple,  strong,  and  effective  ma- 
chine, and  take  much  pleasure  in  awarding 
unanimously  the  meritorious  inventor  of  it  a 
handsome  pair  of  silver  cups. 

"ROBERT  H.  GOLDSBOROUGH, 
"SAMUEL  STEVENS, 
"SAMUEL  T.  KENNARD, 
"ROBERT  BANNING, 
"SAMUEL  HAMBLETON,  Senr., 
"NICHOLAS  GOLDSBOROUGH, 
"EDWARD  N.  HAMBLETON, 
"JAMES  LI.  CHAMBERLAIN, 
"MARTIN  GOLDSBOROUGH, 
"HORATIO  L.  EDMONSON, 
"TENCH  TILGHMAN." 

Mr.  Lane  goes  on  to  say  that  one  of  the  ma- 
chines was  taken  to  La  Porte,  Indiana,  and 
there  put  to  work.  Another  was  sent  to  Illi- 
nois. 

"The  turning  and  fitting  for  these  machines 
was  done  at  the  mill  of  Henry  Rogers,  about 
500  yards  away  from  the  little  shop.  In  the 
following  copy  of  a  recent  affidavit  sent  us, 
date  not  given,  these  last  matters  are  suffi- 
ciently substantiated." 

Mr.  Lane  continues: 

The  True         "Who  invented  the  Reaper?    The  full,  hon- 
Inventor  est  answer  is  that  Obed  Hussey  invented  the 
Reaper. 

"Between  April  and  July,  1835,  John  Lane 
and  Henry  Rogers  (with  Isaac  and  Clark  Lane 

£6 


assisting  in  the  work)  at  their  respective  places 
of  business  one  mile  north  of  Mt.  Healthy, 
Hamilton  County,  Ohio,  made  to  order  of  Obed 
Hussey  one  Reaping  machine  for  S.  F.  and 
Algernon  Foster,  then  of  the  same  County  and 
State.  Said  Reaper  was  made  to  conform  to 
or  with  drawings  and  patterns  made  and  fur- 
nished by  the  said  Obed  Hussey,  who  also  su- 
perintended the  work  of  making  the  machine, 
and  witnessed  its  trial  in  the  field  near  the  mid- 
dle of  June,  1835,  in  presence  of  many  farmers, 
mechanics  and  others  near  by  where  the  same 
was  made;  and  when  and  where  it  was  deliv- 
ered to  the  Messrs.  Foster's,  who  took  this 
same  reaper  to  La  Porte  County,  Indiana,  for 
the  reaping  season  of  the  same  year. 

"For  the  iron  and  steel  work  done  as  afore- 
said books  in  my  possession  show  that  fifty- 
three  and  69/100  dollars  was  paid  by  Messrs. 
Fosters,  July  6th,  1835,  to  John  Lane  and  by 
him  receipted  for  in  full,  etc.,  etc. 

"The  cutting  device  we  then  made  for  this 
machine  evidently  was  the  invention  of  Obed 
Hussey;  and  it  was  as  near  exactly  the  same 
in  all  material  parts  to  the  cutting  device  now 
universally  in  use,  as  the  hand  made  sickle 
could  then  or  now  be  made.  The  sections  of 
sickle  were  forged  steel  blades  V  shaped,  hav- 
ing serrated  or  sickle  cut  edges,  and  riveted  to 
vibrating  bar  passing  through  slotted  fingers, 

67 


substantially  riveted  to  the  apron  or  table 
upon  which  the  cut  grain  fell  in  position  to  be 
raked,  or  'forked  off.' 

"This  Obed  Hussey  machine  cutting  in  a 
good  average  stand  of  barley,  June,  1835,  was 
light  draught  for  two  horses  and  left  as  clean 
and  as  evenly  cut  stubble  behind  it  as  the  best 
of  machines  now  do  the  same  work.  But  one 
fault,  if  any,  with  this  first  reaper  was  the  lack 
of  one  or  more  cogs  in  the  driving  wheel  that 
gave  motion  to  the  sickle,  which  required  the 
team  to  walk  a  bit  too  fast  for  teams  of  habit- 
ual, or  slow  motion. 

(Signed)     "CLARK  LANE." 

Regarding  one  who  became  a  competitor 
of  Hussey,  much  can  be  gathered  from  the  U. 
McCormick  $.  Patent  Office.  McCormick,  who  came  com- 
t!f  I™  paratively  late  in  the  field,  when  applying  for 
an  extension  of  his  patents  made  many  admis- 
sions which  were  afterwards  shown  to  dispute 
that  he  had  accomplished  a  successful  ma- 
chine before  Mr.  Hussey  and  others.  He  tells 
us  in  his  petition  and  brief  to  the  Commis- 
sioner of  Patents  that  he  had  operated  his  ma- 
chine in  some  late  wheat  in  the  harvest  of 
1831,  but  that,  although  he  was  sometimes 
flattered,  he  was  often  discouraged ;  that  he  did 
not  make  sales  or  sell  rights  because  not  satis- 
fied that  the  reaper  would  succeed  well.  He 

58 


was  not  sufficiently  satisfied  of  its  being  a 
"useful"  machine  to  patent  the  reaper;  he  tells 
us  that  its  construction  and  proportions  were 
imperfect  and  its  cutting  apparatus  defective 
on  account  of  liability  to  choke.  He  admits 
that  the  cutting  "proved  not  sufficiently  cer- 
tain to  be  relied  upon  in  all  situations"  until 
"the  improvement  in  the  fingers  and  reversed 
angle  of  the  teeth  of  the  sickle"  shown  in  his 
patent  of  1845  were  adopted.  A  farmer  or- 
dered a  machine  to  be  delivered  in  1841,  but 
McCormick  "did  not  then  feel  that  it  was  safe 
to  warrant  its  performance."  These  facts  are 
found  in  the  records  of  the  United  States  Pat- 
ent Office.  Referring  to  Mr.  Hussey,  on  whose  McCormick's 
patent,  among  others,  McCormick's  applica-  Application 
tion  for  an  extension  was  rejected,  who  proved 
to  be  a  factor  he  must  consider,  he  said:  "I 
did  not  interfere  with  him  because  I  did  not 
find  him  very  much  in  the  way,  calculated  to 
beat  him  without,  and  supposed  it  might  be 
best  to  do  so."  Mr.  Hussey,  no  doubt,  took 
the  charitable  view  and  supposed  Mr.  McCor- 
mick to  have  meant  that  his  proofs  would  have 
been  sufficient  to  support  him  in  his  own 
rights.  Mr.  Hussey,  the  Quaker,  wrote  the 
Board  to  whom  McCormick's  application  for 
an  extension  had  been  referred,  and  from  his 
letter  I  quote: 

59 


"In  view  of  all  these  facts,  I  feel  justified 
in  asking  your  Honorable  Board  a  decision, 
which,  while  it  adjudges  McCormick's  machine 
according  to  its  merits,  will  not  be  prejudicial 
to  my  interests,  seeing  that  Mr.  McCormick 
makes  no  claims  to  the  grand  principle  in  my 
machine,  which  makes  it  valuable,  and  so 
much  better  than  his,  which  principle  I  claim 
as  my  invention. 

Mr.  Hussey's  "I  had  no  intention,  neither  had  I  any  de- 
Athtude  s«re^  to  pjace  any  obstacle  in  the  way  of  the  ex- 
tension of  McCormick's  patent,  but  the  course 
he  has  taken,  before  your  Board  and  before 
Congress,  has  compelled  me  to  act  in  self  de- 
fense, by  which  I  have  given  your  Honorable 
Board  much  trouble,  which  I  would  have  gladly 
avoided." 

Mr.  McCormick  also  said  to  the  Board :  "If 
my  claim  be  made  out  as  so  far  appears  from 
the  evidence  presented,  it  will  be  observed  (as 
I  think)  that  nothing  will  be  left  of  Mr.  Hus- 
sey's claim  to  which  he  is  entitled,  and  all  the 
improvements  he  has  added  since  his  patent 
have,  I  believe,  been  taken  from  mine."  Ref- 
erence is  no  doubt  had  to  the  effect  that  Hus- 
sey,  in  some  of  his  machines,  used  only  a  single 
drive  wheel  and  balanced  his  machine  thereon. 
He  confessed  that  he  never  received  profits 
from  his  first  patent  until  after  twelve  years  of 
study,  and  never  should  have  realized  anything 

60 


from  the  invention  but  for  later  improvements, 
and  he  continues  as  follows:  "If  then  it  shall 
appear  that  I  am  the  original  inventor  of  all  the 
leading  and  important  principles  of  the  inven- 
tion, is  it  wrong  that  I  should  ask  for  recipro- 
cal benefits  for  myself,  who  alone  have  brought 
them  into  being?  Mr.  Hussey's  prior  patent 
stood  in  Mr.  McCormick's  way,  but  its  inventor 
raised  no  voice  against  the  extension  of  Mc- 
Cormick's rights  unless  his  prior  rights  became 
endangered.  The  honors  due  Mr.  Hussey  were 
not  lessened  by  the  Commissioner  of  Patents 
when  treating  of  a  competitive  claimant  to 
have  invented  the  reaper. 

Mr.  McCormick  took  out  a  third  patent  in  Not 
1847  covering  inventions  shown  by  the  state-  McCormick'* 
ment  of  Leander  and  others  to  have  been  the    nvenhons 
invention  of  the  father  or  some  one  else.    An 
application  was  made  for  the  extension  of  this 
patent.    It  then  became  necessary  that  the  ap- 
plicant show  that  he  had  not  reaped  the  ben- 
efits he  believed  himself  entitled  to  through  his 
monopoly  for  the  term  of  the  patent. 

The  value  of  the  second  patent  that  of  1845, 
may  be  gathered  from  the  words  of  the  Com- 
missioner of  Patents:  "The  invention  of  1845, 
considered  in  itself,  and  examined  in  presence 
of  the  reaping  machine  as  then  in  successful  Br|n;ant  nor 
operation,  both  in  Europe  and  America,  can  Extraordinary 

61 


scarcely  be  regarded  as  brilliant  or  in  any  de- 
gree extraordinary." 

The  Commissioner  further  said : 
"It  was  a  conviction  of  the  inefficiency  of 
the  machine  that  led  the  applicant  to  make  his 
invention  of  1847,  which,  by  a  modification  of 
pre-existing  elements,  provided  an  advanta- 
An  Efficient  geous  location  for  the  raker's  seat.  Upon  this 
Machine  his  fame  as  an  inventor  rests,  and  to  this  is  his 
reaper  indebted  for  the  triumphs  it  has 
achieved.  This  seat  had  been  previously  known 
in  at  least  nine  patented  reapers ;  but  it  had  not 
been  well  placed,  and  an  appropriate  location 
for  it  was,  up  to  1847,  an  acknowledged  desid- 
eratum. Whatever,  however,  may  have  been 
the  value  or  the  success  of  the  reaper  as  im- 
proved in  1847,  such  value  or  success  can  exert 
no  influence  in  determining  the  issue  under  dis- 
cussion." 

The  Commissioner  further  said,  referring  to 
the  1847  patent: 

"Without  the  parts  thus  slowly  accumulat- 
ed and  combined,  and  which  have  been  so  un- 
hesitatingly appropriated  by  himself,  his  own 
McCormick's  invention  would  have  been  as  valueless  as 
"Invention"  wouj^  foe  a  shingle  to  him  who  could  find  no 
a  ue  ess  jjOUse_tOp  on  wjjjch  to  nail  it.    The  construc- 
tion insisted  on  would  compel  the  public  to  pay 
again,  and  pay  extravagantly,  for  that  which 

69 


is  already  its  own,  alike  by  purchase  and  by 
long  uninterrupted  possession." 

The  authorities  cited  make  it  clear  the  Hus- 
sey  reaper  was  successful,  from  the  start,  but 
the  Patent  Office  did  not  seem  to  think  that 
the  machine  of  his  opponent  for  honors 
was  so. 

The  Commissioner  in  his  decision  refers  to 
the  testimony  of  William  S.  McCormick,  who, 
at  that  time,  was  a  partner  of  Cyrus  McCor- 
mick as  a  manufacturer  and  seller  of  the  Mc- 
Cormick reaper: 

"As  a  farmer  I  used  the  reaper  without  a 
seat,  before  a  good  one  was  invented,  and  am 
perfectly  certain  that  it  was  so  nearly  worth-  A 
less  that  a  machine  without  one  could  not  be  Machine 
sold  at  any  price  that  would  pay  in  competi- 
tion with  one  having  a  raker's  seat;  this  is  my 
experience  from  my  intimate  connection  with 
the  business  for  many  years."  (Commission- 
er's Decision,  January  28,  1859.) 

I  further  find : 

"In  the  criticism  which  has  been  necessarily 
made  upon  the  invention  of  1845,  there  has 
been  no  design  to  detract  from  the  acknowl- 
edged value  and  usefulness  of  the  machine,  as 
constructed  under  the  patent  of  1847.  It  has 
had  its  brilliant  successes  in  England  and 
France,  but  it  has  also  had  its  marked  discom- 

63 


fitures  when  competing  with  other  machines. 
Though  enjoying  a  great  and  perhaps  a  still 
expanding  popularity,  it  is  by  no  means  a  uni- 
versal favorite." 

The  last  words  of  the  Commissioner  are: 
"The  application  must  therefore  be  rejected." 

There  were  no  questions  raised  as  to  the 
invention  of  Mr.  Hussey. 

The  statement  that  McCormick's  success 
was  founded  upon  the  inventions  of  others  and 
to  no  extent  upon  his  own,  as  quoted  from  "Me- 
morial of  Robert  McCormick,"  is  in  part  ad- 
mitted by  Cyrus  McCormick,  who,  in  his  affi- 
davit when  applying  for  the  extension  of  his 
1847  patent  said:  "He  has,  at  the  expense  of 
much  thought,  time,  and  money,  added  many 
other  important  improvements  to  it  since  1847, 
which  have  contributed  to  the  profits  of  his 
manufacture."  He  then  refers  to  other  im- 
;  McCormick  provements,  saying:  Among  such  improve- 
Had  to^Pay  for  ments  by  others  as  he  has  had  to  pay  for,  are 

jHussey 

Improvements  ^e  mventi°ns  °f  his  brothers,  of  Obed  Hussey, 

of  Jonathan  Reed,  of  Henry  Green,  of  Solymon 

Bell  and  of  Joseph  Nesen.     It  is  known  that 

Mr.  Hussey   ^or  nearly  thirty  years  Obed  Hussey  manufac- 

Did  Not  Need   tured  and  sold  reaping  machines  and  mowers 

the  Improve-   in  his  limited  way  and,  infringing  no  rights  of 

ments  of  others>  had  no  royalties  to  pay.    To  such  an 

Others  .  . 

extent  was  his  mind  that  of  an  inventor,  that 
he  devoted  thought  to  many  side  lines,  the  ex- 

64 


pense  of  which  taxed  his  abilities  until,  when 
his  patent  of  1847  had  but  two  years  to  run, 
he  sold  it  for  $200,000.00. 

COMMISSIONER'S  DECISION 

In  the  matter  of  this  application  of  Eunice 
B.  Hussey,  Administratrix  of  Obed  Hussey, 
deceased,  for  the  extension  of  Reissued  Letters 
Patent  No.  449  for  an  improvement  in  Reap- 
ing Machines,  dated  the  14th  day  of  April,  1857, 
being  a  division  and  re-issue  of  original  Letters 
Patent  No.  5227,  dated  the  7th  day  of  August, 
1847,  for  an  improvement  in  Reaping  machines. 

Also,  the  application  of  the  same  party  for 
the  extension  of  the  Reissued  Letters  Patent 
No.  451,  for  an  improvement  in  Reaping  Ma- 
chines, dated  the  14th  day  of  April  1851,  being 
a  division  and  Reissue  of  Original  Letters  Pat- 
ent No.  5227,  dated  the  7th  day  of  August,  Applications  of 
1847,   for   an   improvement   in    Reaping    Ma-  Mr.  Hnssey's 
chines.  Widow  for 

Patent 

Also,  the  application  of  the  same  party  for  Extension 
the  extension  of  Reissued  Letters  Patent  No.  all  Granted 
742,  for  an  improvement  in  Reaping  Machines, 
dated  the  21st  day  of  June,  1859,  being  a  divi- 
sion of  Reissued  Letters  Patent  No.  450,  dated 
the  14th  of  April,  1857,  being  a  division  and 
Reissue  of  original  Letters  Patent  No.  5227, 

65 


dated  the  7th  day  of  August,  1847,  for  an  im- 
provement in  Reaping  Machines. 

Also  the  application  of  the  same  party  for 
the  extension  of  Reissued  Letters  Patent  No. 
917,  dated  the  28th  day  of  February,  1860,  for 
an  improvement  in  Reaping  Machines,  being  a 
reissue  of  reissued  Letters  Patent  No.  743, 
dated  June  21,  1859,  the  last  named  Patent 
being  a  division  and  reissue  of  reissued  Letters 
Patent  No.  450,  dated  the  14th  day  of  April, 
1857,  which  last  mentioned  patent  was  a  divi- 
sion and  reissue  of  original  Letters  Patent  No. 
5227,  dated  the  7th  of  August,  1847,  for  an  Im- 
provement in  Reaping  Machines. 

These  four  applications  for  the  extension  of 
the  said  four  patents,  Nos.  449,  451,  742  and 
917,  having  been  made  in  due  form  on  the  30th 
day  of  November,  1860,  and  the  Commissioner 
of  Patents  having  caused  to  be  published  in 
due  and  legal  form,  notice  of  said  applications 
and  of  the  time  and  place  when  and  where  the 
same  would  be  considered.  And  the  applicant, 
the  administratrix  and  widow  of  the  patentee, 
having  duly  furnished  and  filed  statements  in 
writing  under  oath  of  the  ascertained  value  of 
the  said  inventions  and  improvements  claimed 
in  said  patents,  and  of  the  receipts  and  expendi- 
tures of  the  patentee  and  his  legal  representa- 
tives sufficiently  in  detail  to  exhibit  a  true  and 
faithful  account  of  loss  and  profit  in  any  man- 

66 


ner  accruing  to  the  patentee  and  his  legal  rep- 
resentatives from  and  by  reason  of  said  inven- 
tions and  patents.  And  the  testimony  in  these 
four  cases  having  been  duly  filed  and  consid- 
ered and  referred  to  the  principal  Examiner 
having  charge  of  the  class  of  inventions  to 
which  these  belong,  and  the  said  Examiner 
having  made  a  full  report  upon  the  said  cases, 
and  particularly  that  the  inventions  or  im- 
provements, secured  by  the  said  four  patents, 
were  new  and  patentable  when  patented.  And 
the  printed  arguments  in  these  cases  having 
been  duly  filed  and  considered,  and  the  day  of 
hearing  viz.  the  28th  day  of  Feb.,  1861,  arrived, 
undersigned,  the  Acting  Commissioner  of  Pat- 
ents, sitting  at  the  time  and  place  designated 
in  the  said  published  notice  to  hear  and  decide 
upon  the  evidence  produced  before  him  both 
for  and  against  the  extension,  and  having  heard 
all  persons  who  appeared  to  show  cause  why 
the  extension  should  not  be  granted,  does  de- 
cide as  follows,  viz.: 

That  the  applications  for  extension  in  these 
cases  were  made  at  a  proper  time,  and  not  pre- 
maturely as  the  opponents  have  contended. 
The  only  ground  alleged  to  support  the  allega- 
tion that  the  applications  were  premature  is 
that  the  receipts  for  the  year  1861  cannot  be 
fully  ascertained  at  this  time,  but  must  be 
estimated  or  guessed  at.  If  this  is  a  good  rea- 

67 


son  for  not  considering  the  applications  now 
it  would  also  be  good  on  the  7th  of  August 
Claim  of  when  the  patent  expires,  for  the  receipts  would 
Opponents  not  then  be  ascertained,  but  would  still  be  the 
Overruled  subjec^  of  estimate  only.  These  receipts  can  be 
as  well  determined  by  this  mode  now,  as  in 
August.  The  objection  on  this  point  is  not 
therefore  well  taken,  and  must  be  overruled. 
An  application  for  extension  cannot  be  regard- 
ed as  premature  if  made  during  the  last  year 
of  the  term  of  the  patent,  and  the  total  receipts 
are  known  or  can  be  estimated  with  reasonable 
certainty.  In  addition  to  this  there  seems  to 
be  no  little  force  in  the  argument  of  Counsel 
that  the  public  convenience  would  be  promoted 
by  an  early  decision  upon  these  cases  before 
manufacturers  enter  upon  their  preparations 
for  another  year's  business. 

Besides  these  considerations,  which  of 
themselves  are  sufficient  to  determine  the  pro- 
priety of  hearing  these  cases  at  the  present 
time,  the  late  Commissioner  of  Patents  fixed 
this  time  for  these  hearings  with  reference  to 
the  public  interests  therein,  and  is  an  addi- 
tional reason  why  it  should  be  adhered  to,  yet 
I  should  have  no  hesitation  in  postponing  the 
hearing  if  it  were  made  to  appear  that  the  pub- 
lic interest  were  likely  in  any  way  to  be  sub- 
served by  such  postponement. 
68 


The  report  of  the  Examiner  leaves  no  doubt 
in  my  mind  as  to  the  novelty  of  each  of  the 
inventions  which  constitute  the  subject  matter  Value  and 
of  the  four  patents  for  which  the  extensions  are  Importance 


asked.    His  report  is  equally  conclusive  as  to 

...  ,     ,        .  .  ,     .  ,    Inventions 

the  utility  of  the  inventions,  their  value  and  Fully 
importance  to  the  public,  and  as  to  the  pat-  Established 
entee's  diligence  in  introducing  them  into  pub- 
lic use,  and  his  efforts  to  derive  remuneration 
from  their  sale. 

From  a  careful  examination  of  all  these 
points  myself,  I  have  arrived  at  the  same  con- 
clusion as  the  Examiner. 

The  Counsel,  Wm.  N.  Whitely,  the  oppo- 
nent of  these  extensions  have  urged  with  great 
pertinacity  that  the  inventions  are  not  novel. 
They  allege  that  the  same  thing  existed  before 
in  Hiram  Moore's  "Big  Harvester"  in  Michi- 
gan —  the  Ambler  Machine  in  New  York  —  the 
Nicholson  Machine  in  Maryland  —  and  the 
White  and  Hoyle  Machines  in  Ohio.  They 
also  contend  that  the  invention  claimed  in  Opponent* 
Patent  No.  451  especially,  is  of  no  utility  or  Contentions 
value.  On  a  careful  review  of  all  these  points  b°paL°sV 
with  the  light  of  the  Argument  of  Counsel,  I 
am  quite  clear  that  the  Examiners  conclusion 
as  to  the  novelty  and  utility  of  Hussey's  inven- 
tion are  sound.  The  Moore  or  "Big  Harves- 
ter" cutting  apparatus,  the  testimony  shows 
was  designated  for  the  performance  of  a  dif- 

69 


ferent  duty  from  Hussey's  and  could  not  with- 
out essential  changes  of  construction,  amount- 
ing to  changes  in  its  principle  and  mode  of  op- 
eration, be  used  for  the  same  purposes  as  that 
of  Hussey. 

The  Ambler  machine  had  a  straight  edge 
cutter  vibrating  on  arms  through  barbed  or 
open  slotted  fingers.  His  Cutting  apparatus 
lacked  an  essential  element  found  in  Hussey's 
the  scalloped  cutter,  to  say  nothing  of  other 
material  differences.  This  machine  has  noth- 
ing to  impeach  the  novelty  of  Hussey's  inven- 
tions. The  Nicholson  Model  has  no  vibrating 
scalloped  cutter  which  is  one  of  the  specific 
elements  of  Hussey's  combination.  The  White 
machine  as  shown  in  the  exhibit  produced  and 
which  the  testimony  shows  has  been  recently 
fabricated  is  not  substantially  the  same  com- 
bination claimed  in  patent  No.  742.  It  has  not 
like  Hussey's  a  cutter  with  flush  edges  on  both 
sides  of  the  angle  of  the  forks  on  the  same  side 
of  the  blade.  The  Hoyle  Machine,  according 
to  Hoyle's  own  deposition,  is  subsequent  in 
date  to  Hussey's  invention. 

It  is  contended  by  the  opponents  that  the 
patent  No.  451  has  no  utility  or  value.    I  am 
Utility  of  mclmed  to  the  opinion  that  the  utility  of  the 
Hussey's  improvement  specified  in  this  patent  is,  of  it- 
Inventions  self,  small,  compared  with  the  improvements 
covered  by  the  other  patents  of  Hussey  now 

70 


before  me,  which  are  all  of  very  great  utility, 
and  two  of  them  indispensable  in  the  present 
state  of  the  art.  Still  since  the  novelty  of  the 
improvement  claimed  in  No.  451,  is  admitted 
and  is  proven  by  the  testimony  of  Henry  B. 
Renwick  to  have  some  utility  as  one  of  this 
series  of  patents,  I  think  it  has  sufficient  utility 
to  justify  an  extension. 

The  contestant's  counsel  have  argued  from 
the  testimony  of  Lovegrove,  that  Hussey  aban- 
doned his  inventions  to  the  public  by  having 
them  on  sale  more  than  two  years  before  ap- 
plying for  a  patent.  The  testimony  does  not 
sustain  this  point.  Besides,  an  inventor  does 

...  .  ,  ,  ,.      ,        Mr.  Hussey 

not  abandon  his  invention  to  the  public  by  Did  Not 
constructing  a  machine  embracing  it,  in  the  Abandon 
same  factory  where  he  makes  and  sells  other  His 
machines.     Nor  by  using  it  experimentally  in 
such  a  factory  or  elsewheres.    Nor  by  keeping 
it  in  such  a  factory  from  the  autumn  of  one 
year  to  the  harvest  of  the  next  year.    Nor  by 
doing  all  or  any  of  these  things  more  than  two 
years  before  his  application  for  a  patent. 

The  statement  of  receipts  and  expenditures 
is  unusually  full  and  in  detail,  more  so  than 
is  necessary  to  fulfill  the  requirements  of  the 
law. 

There  are  two  classes  of  expenditures  and 
two  corresponding  classes  of  receipts,  viz.: 

71 


1st.  Expenditures  and  receipts  on  account 
of  the  manufacture  and  sale  of  Reapers  and 
Mowing  Machines  embracing  the  patentee's 
improvements. 

2nd.  Expenditures  and  receipts  on  account 
of  the  sales  of  Patent  rights  and  licenses,  and 
compromise  of  infringements. 

The  Patentee  manufactured  and  sold  about 
2,000  machines,  and  a  few  other  articles  at  a 

cost  of  materials  and  labor $195,292.88 

Shop  and  Tools 12,500.00 

One-quarter    of    patentee's    time 
and  expenses   9,008 . 22 


$216,801.10 

The  receipts  on  account  of  the  sale  of  these 
manufactures  were: 

Cash  for  Reapers $216,607.90 

Cash  for  parts  of  Reapers 22,416.58 

Notes  and  Book  Accounts 11,388.23 

Cash  for  Corn  Crushers 1,135 . 25 

Discount  and  Interest 2,327.84 


$253,875.80 

The  result  of  the  manufacturing  business  is 
an  excess  of  receipts  over  expenditures  of  $37,- 
074.70.  This  statement,  however,  allows  noth- 
ing for  manufacturer's  profits.  An  allowance 

72 


for  such  profit  ought  to  be  made  but  in  this 
case  the  object  is  to  eliminate  from  the  gross 
receipts  such  profits  as  have  in  any  manner  ac- 
crued from  or  by  reason  of  the  inventions 
claimed  in  the  patents.  Now  receipts  or  profits 
that  result  from  business  talents  or  skill  in 
manufacturing  or  in  financeering  are  not  re- 
ceipts or  profits  in  any  manner  accruing  from 
or  by  reason  of  an  invention.  In  the  case  of 
Seymour  and  Morgan  vs.  McCormick-How- 
ards  Reports  Vol.  16  p.  480,  the  Supreme  Court 
of  the  United  States  held  that  the  ruling  of 
Judge  Nelson  that  the  whole  profits  of  the  man- 
ufacture of  Reaping  machines  in  which  one 
small  part  of  the  machines  infringed  a  patent 
was  to  be  considered  as  accruing  from  the  use 
of  the  patented  part  was  erroneous,  and  that  a 
reasonable  manufacturer's  profit  for  the  use  of 
the  Capital  so,  in  addition  to  the  actual  cost  of 
the  machine  must  first  be  deducted  from  the 
gross  receipts,  and  if  then  there  was  any  ex- 
cess, that  might  be  assigned  to  patents.  This 
decision  I  should  deem  binding  and  conclusive 
upon  the  subject  even  if  I  did  not  think  that 
the  values  of  business  capital  and  talent  are  as 
fairly  charges  against  the  receipts  of  business 
as  the  values  of  a  business  house  or  tools. 

In  this  case  there  is  only  an  excess  of  $37,-  An 
074.70  of  the  receipts  over  the  expenditure  or  Inadequate 
something  less  than  14  per  cent  upon  the  gross  Profit 
78 


amount  of  sales.  This  is  a  very  inadequate 
profit  for  manufacturing  and  selling,  but  it  is 
all  there  is,  and  it  is  all  that  I  can  allow. 

If  the  excess  of  the  receipts  over  the  ex- 
penditures had  amounted  to  three  times  four- 
teen per  cent,  I  should  have  had  no  hesitation 
in  allowing  the  whole  of  it  for  manufacturer's 
profit,  and  should  not  have  deemed  it  more 
than  a  reasonable  allowance  in  view  of  the  tes- 
timony of  Long,  which  shows  that  his  firm 
have  made  a  profit  of  over  fifty  per  cent  after 
paying  patent  fees,  on  their  manufacture  of 
reapers. 

It  seems  to  be  supposed  from  the  reference 
which  has  beeen  made  to  Commissioner  Holt's 
decision  in  the  case  of  McCormick's  applica- 
tion for  the  extension  of  his  patent  of  1845, 
that  he  entertained  views  -at  variance  with 
those  I  have  expressed  as  to  the  justice  of  al- 
lowing manufacturer's  profits  as  a  part  of  the 
expenditure,  and  as  an  offset  against  the  re- 
ceipts, but  a  careful  examination  of  that  opinion 
will  show  clearly  that  Mr.  Holt  was  not  will- 
ing to  allow  a  charge  for  the  use  of  Capital, 
and  for  wear  and  tear  of  machines  (which  are 
the  Constituent  elements  of  a  manufacturer's 
claim  to  allow  for  profit)  and  then,  again  allow 
a  second  or  duplicate  charge  for  the  same 
things  under  the  name  of  manufacturer's 
74 


profits.    This  is  the  extent  to  which  Mr.  Holt 
goes,  and  I  fully  agree  with  him. 

The  expenditures  on  account  of  the  patents 
and  the  sale  of  rights  and  licenses  under  the 
same  are : 

For  three  quarter  of  patentee's 

labor  and  expense $27,024 . 68 

For  sundry  legal  and  traveling 

expenses 44,562 . 88 


$71,587.56 

The  receipts  on  the  same  account  are : 
Cash  for  licenses,  sale  of  rights, 

etc $92,788.38 

Notes  and  unsettled  accounts 23,748 . 89 

License  fees  estimated  for  1861. .         10,000.00 


$126,537.27 

Showing  that  the  receipts  exceed  the  ex- 
penditures by  $54,949.71  or  $13,737.42  for  each 
of  the  four  patents. 

This  I  can  have  no  hesitation  in  pronoun- 
cing to  be  a  totally  inadequate  compensation 
for  inventions  of  such  great  value  and  import- 
ance. 

After  a  most  laborious  examination  and 
careful  consideration  of  the  whole  matter,  it 
appears  to  my  full  and  entire  satisfaction,  hav- 

75 


ing  due  regard  to  the  public  interest  therein, 
that  it  is  just  and  proper  that  the  term  of  the 
said  reissued  patents  No.  449,  No.  451,  No. 
742,  and  No.  917  should  severally  be  extended 
by  reason  of  the  patentee,  without  fault  or 
neglect  on  his  part,  having  failed  to  obtain 
from  the  use  and  sale  of  his  said  inventions  a 
reasonable  remuneration  for  the  time,  ingenu- 
ity and  expense  bestowed  upon  the  same  and 
the  introduction  thereof  into  use. 

Hussey's  The  list  of  licenses  under  these  patents 
Inventions  show  the  acquiescence  of  the  principal  manu- 

the  Basis  facturers  in  the  justice  of  Hussey's  claims. 
of  all  Reaper  Thg  j.^  ghows  that  the  manufacturers  of  Reap- 

Manufact- 

urers  Profits  ers  ^ave  ma^e  large  profits,  and  that  Hussey  s 
improvements  are  the  foundation  of  their  suc- 
cess. It  is  certainly  just  and  equitable  that 
Hussey's  heirs  should  be  allowed  to  participate 
in  the  advantages  of  using  his  own  inventions 
to  an  extent  more  nearly  commensurate  with 
the  merits  of  those  inventions. 

The  character  of  the  opposition  to  these  ap- 
plications, in  which  but  a  single  manufacturer 
has  entered  an  appearance  is  such,  as  greatly 
strengthens  this  view,  and  I  feel  constrained 
A  Merited  to  regar(*  ^is  tacit  assent,  of  the  great  body  of 
Tribute  manufacturers  to  these  applications  for  exten- 
from  the  sion,  an  additional  evidence  of  the  soundness  of 
U.  S.  Patent  mv  own  conclusions.    As  it  is  also  a  fitting  and 

f\f£* 

B  merited  tribute  to  Obed  Hussey,  now  in  his 

76 


grave,  for  the  invaluable  contributions  his 
genius  and  industry  have  made  to  the  improve- 
ments of  the  age. 

The  said  four  patents,  Nos,  449,  451,  742  and 
917,  are  accordingly  extended  for  the  term  of 
seven  years  from  the  7th  day  of  August,  1861. 

S.  T.  SHUGERT, 
Acting  Commissioner  of  Patents. 
United  States  Patent  Office, 
Mar.  1,  1861. 

A  BRIEF  NARRATIVE  OF  THE 
INVENTION  OF  REAPING  MACHINES 

And  an  Examination  of  the  Claims  for  Priority 
of  Invention 

The  object  aimed  at  in  this  examination  is 
to  ascertain  as  far  as  reliable  evidence  within 
reach  will  establish  the  fact — and  before  the 
evidence  may  be  lost — to  whom  belongs  the 
credit  of  first  rendering  the  Reaping  and  Mow- 
ing Machine  a  practical  and  available  imple- 
ment to  the  American  farmer;  not  who  theo- 
retically invented  a  machine  for  the  purpose, 
that  may  have  worked  an  hour  only,  and  very 
imperfectly  for  that  short  period,  and  was  then 
laid  aside;  but  who  rendered  it  an  operating 
and  efficient  machine  that  was  proved  by  suc- 
cessive years  in  the  harvest  field,  capable  of 

77 


doing  its  work,  and  doing  it  well;  better  than 
either  the  scythe  or  cradle. 

The  object  is  not  to  detract  from  the  merits 
fairly  claimed  by  any  inventor;  but  it  is  to 
examine  into  some  of  the  rival  claims,  furnish 
the  evidence  that  has  satisfied  our  own  minds, 
and  leave  it  for  others  to  judge  for  themselves. 
We  would  not  intentionally  deprive  an  inventor 
of  his  often  dearly  bought  and  hard-earned 
fame — the  creation  of  his  own  genius — for  it  is 
more  prized  than  even  fine  gold  by  many.  But 
it  is  equally  just  that  merit  should  be  acknowl- 
edged, and  the  meed  of  praise  awarded,  where 
it  is  honestly  and  fairly  due ;  and  to  this  end  we 
propose  and  intend  to  examine  into  the  evi- 
dence closely  and  critically.  It  may  also  be 
right  to  remark  that  we  have  no  private  or 
pecuniary  interest  whatever,  in  these,  or  any 
other  patent  claims. 

As  to  the  theoretical  portion  of  the  business, 
the  enquiry  might  be  greatly  extended ;  indeed 
for  past  centuries,  as  we  have  imperfect  ac- 
counts of  Reaping  Machines  being  used  by  the 
Attempts  Romans.  If  the  ancients  were  successful  in 
of  the  making  a  practical  implement  for  Reaping,  by 
horse,  or  ox  power,  as  some  ancient  writers  as- 
sert, we  certainly  have  no  correct  and  reliable 
account  of  a  machine  that  would  be  consid- 
ered efficient  or  useful  at  the  present  day;  a 
machine  to  save  or  tear  off  the  heads  only — as 
78 


described  by  Pliny  and  Palladius — would  more 
properly  be  termed  a  gathering  machine,  and 
not  at  all  suited  to  the  wants  and  habits  of 
modern  farmers. 

It  was  not  until  near  the  close  of  the  past, 
and  within  the  present  century,  so  far  as  we 
can  learn,  that  the  subject  again  claimed  much 
attention  of  the  inventive  talent  of  either  this, 
or  foreign  countries.  Of  some  half  a  dozen  or 
more  attempts  made  in  Great  Britain,  and  re- 
corded in  Loudon's  Encyclopedia  of  Agricul- 
ture, the  Edinburg  Encyclopedia,  and  other 
similar  works,  all,  or  nearly  all,  relief  either 
upon  scythes  or  cutters,  with  a  rotary  motion,  English 
or  vibrating  shears.  And  although  there  was  Endeavors 
"go  ahead"  about  them  in  one  sense  of  the 
term,  as  it  was  intended  for  the  "cart  to  go  be- 
fore the  horse,"  none  of  them  appeared  to  have 
gained,  or  certainly  not  long  retained,  the  con- 
fidence of  the  farmers ;  for  at  the  exhibition  of 
the  "World's  Fair  in  London,"  the  whole  King- 
dom could  not  raise  a  Reaping  Machine; — a 
practical  implement  which  was  considered 
worth  using  and  exhibiting. 

That  the  idea  was  obsolete  there,  and  had 
been  unsuccessful,  is  clearly  proved  by  the  fact 
that  the  English  journals  and  writers  of  that 
period,  without  a  single  exception,  spoke  of 
the  American  Reapers — after  the  trials! — as 
"completely  successful" — "taking  every  one  by 

79 


surprise" — "their  reaping  machines  have  aston- 
ished our  agriculturists" — "few  subjects  have 
created  a  greater  sensation  in  the  agricultural 
world  than  the  recent  introduction  into  the 
country  of  the  reaping  machines" — the  "curi- 
osity of  the  crowd  was  irrepressible  to  witness 
such  a  novelty,  even  to  stopping  the  machine, 
and  trampling  the  grain  under  foot,"  etc.,  etc. — 
Much  more  and  similar  evidence  is  at  hand; 
but  better  need  not  be  produced  to  prove  the 
entire  failure  of  reaping  machines  in  Great 
Britain,  as  late  as  1851.  We  would  also  refer 
the  curious  to  Rees'  Cyclopedia,  for  a  very 
brief  account  of  what  had  been  effected; — a 
few  paragraphs  only  are  written  on  reaping 
machines,  but  several  pages  are  compiled  as  to 
the  use  of  the  scythe,  sickle  or  reap  hook,  and 
reaping  fork.  The  Doctor  refers  to  Plunknett's 
Machine  by  name,  as  being  "somewhat  on  a 
new  principle,  the  horse  drawing  the  machine 
instead  of  pushing  it  forward  as  was  the  old 
mode  of  applying  the  power."  The  machine  is 
fully  represented  in  the  Farmers'  Dictionary; 
and  he  winds  up  the  account  as  follows:  "But 
the  success  with  which  they  have  been  attend- 
English  e<^  ^as  hit'ierto  been  far  from  complete ;"  again, 
Failure  "Other  machines  of  this  kind  have  still  more 
lately  been  invented  by  other  persons  [mean- 
ing of  course  his  own  countrymen]  but  without 
answering  the  purpose  in  that  full  and  com- 

80 


plete  manner  which  is  necessary  in  this  sort 
of  work." 

The  Doctor  undertakes  to  tell  us  what  is 
wanted,  but  fails  entirely  to  inform  his  readers 
how  to  do  it.  That  John  Bull  had  not  done  it 
is  clearly  established;  but  Brother  Jonathan, 
the  "Live  Yankee,"  as  John  calls  his  cousin, 
has  solved  the  problem;  and  the  solution  is  so 
simple,  when  you  know  how  to  do  it !  that  it  is 
marvelously  strange  no  one  for  centuries  had 
before  struck  upon  the  right  key. 

Philip  Pusey,  Esq.,  M.  P.  and  F.  R.  S. — the 
chief  manager  of  the  London  Exhibition — ad- 
mits the  failure,  though  apparently  reluctantly; 
but  the  source  of  his  information,  in  writing 
about  the  American  machines,  was  interested 
and  defective ;  and  when  he  again  writes  on  this 
subject  he  will  be  better  informed.  He  says: 
"At  the  opening  of  this  century  it  was  thought 
that  a  successful  reaping  machine  had  been 
invented,  and  a  reward  had  been  voted  by 
Parliament  to  its  author.  The  machine  was 
employed  here  and  abroad,  but  from  its  intri- 
cacy, fell  into  disuse.  Another  has  been  lately 
devised  in  one  of  our  Colonies,  which  cuts  off 
the  heads  of  the  corn,  but  leaves  the  straw 
standing,  a  fatal  defect  in  an  old  settled  coun- 
try, where  the  growth  of  corn  is  forced  by  the 
application  of  dung.  Our  farmers  may  well, 
therefore,  have  been  astonished  by  an  Amer- 

81 


ican  implement  which  not  only  reaped  the 
wheat,  but  performed  the  work  with  the  neat- 
ness and  certainty  of  an  old  and  perfect  ma- 
chine. Its  novelty  of  action  reminded  one  of 
seeing  the  first  engine  run  on  the  Liverpool 
and  Manchester  railway  in  1830.  Its  perfec- 
tion depended  on  its  being  new  only  in  Eng- 
land; but  in  America  the  result  of  repeated 
disappointments  and  untired  perseverance, 
etc." 

We  propose  to  prove,  and  by  better  evi- 
dence, and  disinterested  too,  than  he  then  had, 
that  in  1833,  near  the  date  of  "the  first  engine 
run  on  the  Liverpool  and  Manchester  railway 
in  1830,"  the  American  machine  cut  the  "corn" 
just  as  perfectly,  with  equal  "neatness  and  cer- 
tainty" as  did  the  "Novelty"  or  "Rocket"  pass 
over  the  Liverpool  and  Manchester  railway. 
We  shall  again  recur  to  English  authority. 
John  Bull  is  a  right  honest  and  clever  old  gen- 
tleman in  the  main;  but  he  is  rather  prone  to 
claim  what  he  has  no  title  for — inventions,  as 
well  as  territory.  We  are  willing  to  give  him 
what  he  can  show  a  clear  deed  for,  but  no  more. 
English  **e  keat  us  kv  one  year  only  in  the  Locomo- 
Claims  trve  J  but  we  fairly  beat  him  eighteen  or  twenty 
in  the  Reaping  Machine;  and  yet  some  of  his 
writers  contend  to  this  day  that  we  "pirated" 
from  Bell  and  other  English  inventors  all  we 
know! 

88 


The  excitement  and  sensation  thus  pro- 
duced by  the  American  Reapers,  caused  re- 
newed efforts  on  the  part  of  English  inventors ; 
some  who  had  near  a  quarter  of  a  century  pre- 
viously, been  endeavoring  to  effect  this  "great 
desideratum,"  to  use  an  English  editorial;  and 
the  most  conspicuous  of  these  was  one  invent- 
ed by  the  Rev.  Patrick  Bell,  of  Scotland.  Of 
the  half  a  score  or  more  and  previous  inventors 
in  Great  Britain — Boyce,  Plunknett,  Gladstone 
of  Castle  Douglass,  Salmon  of  Waburn,  Smith 
of  Deanston  in  Perthshire,  etc.,  etc. — none  were 
waked  up  from  their  Rip  Van  Winkle  slum- 
bers ;  or  if  they  were,  the  world  is  not  advised 
of  it.  They  all  used  revolving  scythes,  revolv-  English 
ing  cutters,  or  shears  instead.  Several  trials  Inventors 
were  made  with  Bell's  in  1828  or  1829 ;  and  a  an.d  Their 
very  full  and  minute  description  with  plates, 
was  published  some  24  or  25  years  ago,  and 
may  be  found  in  London's  Encyclopedia  of  Ag- 
riculture. 

It  was,  however,  too  complicated,  too  cum- 
bersome and  expensive,  performed  too  little 
service,  and  required  too  much  tinkering  and 
repairs  to  be  viewed  as  a  practical  and  available 
implement. — The  English  farmer  found  the 
sickle  or  reap  hook  preferable,  for  it  was  every- 
where resorted  to. — The  cutting  apparatus  of 
Bell's  consisted  of  shears,  one  half  stationary, 
the  other  vibrating,  and  turning  on  the  bolt 
83 


that  confined  them  to  the  iron  bar  which  ex- 
tends across  the  front  of  the  frame.  The  vi- 
brating motion  was  given  by  connecting  the 
back  end  of  one  shear  to  a  bar — making  the 
bolt  the  fulcrum — and  which  was  attached  to 
a  crank,  revolving  by  gear  to  the  driving 
wheels. 

A  reel  was  used  to  gather  the  grain  to  the 
shears,  and  adjustable,  back  and  forth,  and 
Bell's  higher  or  lower,  to  suit  the  height  of  the  grain. 
Machine  A  revolving  apron  delivered  the  grain  in  a  con- 
tinuous swath;  and  the  team  was  attached  to 
the  rear  of  the  machine,  pushing  it  through  the 
grain. 

We  have  been  more  minute  in  the  descrip- 
tion of  Bell's  machine,  because  it  may  have 
been  the  foundation  of  some  of  the  early,  and 
nearly  simultaneous  attempts  made  in  this 
country.  In  fact  it  does  not  admit  of  doubt 
that  several  were  nearly  identical  with  Bell's 
in  the  use  of  the  shears  and  reel,  though  with 
much  more  simple  gearing,  and  in  the  general 
arrangement.  Whether  they  were  original  in- 
ventions, cannot  be  ascertained.  In  this  coun- 
try, from  1800  to  1833  out  of  some  15  or  20 
patents  granted  for  "cutting  grain"  and  "cut- 
ting grass,"  only  four  appear  to  have  been  "re- 
stored"; i.  e.  technically  speaking,  "not  re- 
stored" in  models  and  drawings  after  the  burn- 
ing of  the  Patent  Office  in  1836.  Many,  if  not 

84 


most  of  them,  were  probably  improvements  in 
the  grain  cradle,  and  mowing  scythe;  though 
the  names  are  preserved,  there  is  no  record  to 
show  for  what  particulars  the  patents  were 
granted.  There  can  be  no  doubt,  however, 
that  the  inventors  considered  them  valueless, 
as  they  were  "not  restored,"  though  Congress 
voted  large  sums  to  replace  the  burnt  models 
and  drawings,  without  any  expense  to  the 
parties.  Of  those  restored  James  Ten  Eyck's 
patent  is  dated  1825,  Wm.  Manning's  in  1831, 
Wm.  &  Thos.  Schnebly's  in  1833,  and  Obed 
Hussey's  also  in  1833. 

James  Ten  Eyck  used  an  open  reel;  not 
only  to  gather  the  grain,  but  his  cutters  or 
shears,  were  attached  to,  and  revolved  with  the 
reel; — very  much,  if  not  exactly  on  the  princi- 
ple of  shearing  cloth. 

William  Manning  used  another  form  of  cut- 
ters, and  quite  different  from  James  Ten  Eyck's 
— he  likewise  used  fingers  or  teeth  to  support 
the  grain  during  the  action  of  the  horizontal 
cutters. 

William  and  Thomas  Schnebly  of  Maryland 
also  used  the  reel,  with  shears  as  cutters,  very 
similar  to  Bell's. 

Abraham  Randall,  or  Rundell,  of  New  York 
(for  the  name  is  spelled  both  ways),  was  an- 
other of  the  early  inventors.  His  patent  of 
1835  is  not  restored,  though  it  is  stated  his  ma- 

86 


chine  was  experimented  with  as  early  as  1833 
or  1834.  He  also  used  the  reel,  and  his  cutters, 
it  is  said,  were  similar  to  Bell's — using  shears. 
T.  D.  Burrall,  of  New  York,  was  also  one 
of  the  early  inventors,  about  1832  or  1833,  but 
we  believe  professedly  after  Bell's,  so  far  as  to 
use  a  reel  and  shears. 

None  None  of  these  machines,  however,  Hussey's 
Successful  excepted,  were  successful,  or  were  used  any 
length  of  time ;  nor  is  it  necessary  here  to  refer 
particularly  to  other  attempts,  about  this  time, 
or  indeed  prior  to  this  period,  for  they  were 
equally  unsuccessful;  and  their  inventors  can- 
not claim  the  merit  of  doing  a  thing,  that  was 
not  in  fact  performed — making  an  efficient  and 
successful  Reaper.  We  may  here  remark,  how- 
ever, that  so  far  as  now  known,  no  machine 
like  Bell's,  on  the  shear  or  scissor  principle,  has 
succeeded  in  this  country;  or  as  we  believe,  is 
ever  likely  to  succeed.  We  have  seen  a  number 
by  different  inventors,  and  all  have  failed  to 
give  satisfaction.  They  may  work  well  for  a 
very  brief  period  and  with  keen  edges;  but  as 
they  become  dull,  the  shears  are  forced  apart 
by  the  straw  and  grass — particularly  the  latter, 
and  the  machine  fails,  as  it  inevitably  must  do, 
in  its  allotted  duty,  and  for  very  obvious  rea- 
sons. If  the  shear  rivet  or  bolt  is  kept  tight 
there  is  too  much  friction;  if  loose  enough  to 
play  freely  it  is  too  loose  to  cut  well ;  and,  last- 

86 


ly,  it  is  too  liable  to  wear  at  the  most  import- 
ant point  of  the  whole  machine.  During  the 
harvest  of  1853  in  England  every  effort  was 
made  to  uphold  Bell's  machine;  in  some  cases 
prizes  were  awarded  to  it,  though  evidently 
partial;  for  in  the  face  of  these  awards  some 
who  witnessed  the  trials,  and  had  used  Bell's 
machines,  laid  them  aside  and  purchased  Hus- 
sey's.  At  the  close  of  the  season,  as  we  learn 
from  reliable  authority,  even  the  engineers  who 
operated  Bell's,  frankly  admitted  that  the 
American  machine  as  exhibited  by  Hussey,  was 
the  better  implement,  owing  to  the  arrange- 
ment of  the  guards  and  knives ;  Bell's  required 
so  much  tinkering,  that  several  machines  were 
required  to  cope  with  one  of  Hussey's.  At  the  Hnss«y'» 
recent  harvest  (1854)  the  Mark  Lane  Express  Aac  'ne 

r  American 

acknowledges  that  the  Royal  Agricultural  So-  Triumph 
cieties'  show  at  Lincoln,  Bell's  machine  was  "at 
last  fairly  beaten"  by  Hussey's,  including  Mc- 
Cormick's,  and  Hussey's  machine  received  the 
prize  over  all  others.  It  is  just,  however,  to 
add,  that  far  as  we  consider  Bell's  machine  be- 
hind some  of  the  present  day,  yet  complex  and 
cumbersome  as  it  was,  it  combined  more  of  the 
essential  features  of  success  than  any  Reaper 
that  preceded  it. 

We  now  come  to  1833,  the  date  of  Hussey's 
patent;  and  to  1834,  the  date  of  C.  H.  McCor- 
mick's  first  patent.    These  were  known  and  ad- 
87 


mitted  by  all  to  have  been  the  rivals  for  popular 
favor  and  patronage,  from  about  the  year  1844 
or  1845  to  the  opening  of  the  great  Industrial 
Exhibition  in  London,  in  1851.  To  these,  there- 
fore, the  enquiry  will  be  more  particularly 
directed. 

We  must,  however,  refer  back  for  a  brief 
period  to  1831;  for  although  C.  H.  McCor- 
mick's  first  patent  was  dated  in  1834,  yet  when 
he  applied  for  his  extension  in  1848  he  alleged 
that  his  invention  was  prior  to  Hussey's,  as  he 
had  invented  a  machine  in  1831,  two  years  be- 
fore the  date  of  (X  Hussey's,  and  three  years 
before 'the  date  of  his  own  patent.  The  evi- 
dence produced  written  and  prepared  by  C.  H. 
McCormick  and  now  on  file  in  the  Patent 
Office)  was  deemed  inadmissible  and  informal 
by  the  Board,  and  it  refused  to  go  on  with  the 
examination  either  as  to  priority  or  validity  of 
invention  without  notice  to  Hussey — his  patent 
being  called  in  question  by  McCormick — to  be 
present  when  the  depositions  were  taken. 
licCormick's  Before,  however,  receiving  the  official  no- 
Attempt  to  tjce>  he  was  called  on  by  C.  H.  McCormick  in 
*  °ssfys  Baltimore,  and  requested  to  sign  a  paper, 

Signature 

agreeing  or  admitting,  that  the  testimony  he 
had  himself  prepared  should  be  considered  evi- 
dence— i.  e.  considered  formal;  alleging  that  it 
would  save  him  trouble  and  expense  in  going 
to  Virginia.  This  was  declined  by  Hussey  on 

88 


the  ground  that  he  might  thus  unwittingly  in- 
jure himself;  he  having  previously  applied  for 
an  extension  of  his  own  Patent.  Neither  was 
he  then  aware  of  the  nature  of  this  evidence; 
or  until  this  interview,  was  he  advised  of  C.  H. 
McCormick's  application  for  extension. 

Hussey  was  subsequently  duly  notified  by 
order  of  the  Board  to  be  present  at  taking  the 
depositions  in  Augusta  County,  Virginia, — the 
Board  having  adjourned  three  weeks  for  that 
purpose. 

Either  just  previous  or  subsequent  to  these 
proceedings  the  case  was  referred  by  the  Com- 
missioner of  Patents,  or  Board  of  Extensions, 
to  Dr.  Page,  one  of  the  Examiners  of  the  office. 

His  report  is  as  follows : 

"Patent  Office, 
«sir.  "Jan.  22d,  1848. 

"In  compliance  with  your  requisition  I  have 
examined  the  patent  of  Cyrus  H.  McCormick, 
dated  31st  June,  1834,  and  found  that  the  prin- 
cipal features  embraced  in  said  patent,  viz,  the 
cutting-knife  and  mode  of  operating  it,  the  fin- 
gers to  guide  the  grain  and  the  revolving  rack 
for  gathering  the  grain,  were  not  new  at  the 
time  of  granting  said  letters  patent. 

"The  knife-fingers  and  general  arrange- 
ments and  operation  of  the  cutting  apparatus 

89 


are  found  in  the  reaping  machine  of  O.  Hussey, 
patented  31st  Dec.,  1833. 

"The  revolving  rack  presents  novelty  chiefly 
in  form,  as  its  operation  is  similar  to  the  re- 
volving frame  of  James  Ten  Eyck,  patented 
2nd  November,  1825. 

"Respectfully  submitted, 

"CHAS.  G.  PAGE, 

"Examiner. 
"Hon.  Edmund  Burke,  Com'r  of  Patents." 

As  some  have  enquired,  and  others  may  en- 
quire, why  a  patent  should  issue  under  these 
circumstances,  we  reply,  that  previous  to  1836 
but  little,  if  any,  examination  was  made  as  to 
priority  of  inventions,  or  into  preceding  Pat- 
ents; the  applicant  made  oath  as  to  his  inven- 
tion, and  the  patent  was  issued  as  a  matter  of 
course.  And  as  another  matter  of  course,  if 
the  rival  interests  clashed,  litigation  was  the 
result: — the  Courts  and  juries  often  decided 
what  they  little  understood,  and  at  times  not  at 
all,  after  the  pleading  of  well  fee'd  lawyers;  a 
pretty  fair  illustration  of  the  fable  of  the  boys 
and  frogs ;  it  may  be  fun  for  the  lawyers  but  it 
is  death  to  the  hopes  of  many  a  poor  patentee. 
We  are,  however,  pleased  to  perceive  a  dispo- 
sition manifested  by  the  courts  to  sustain  pat- 
ents; even  if  occasionally  an  unjust  claim  is 
recognized  as  a  valid  one,  it  is  better,  according 

90 


to  the  legal  and  moral  maxim,  that  half  a  dozen 
rogues  should  escape  punishment  for  a  time, 
than  that  one  innocent  person  should  be  un- 
justly convicted ;  the  rogue  is  almost  certain  to 
be  caught  in  the  end,  and  truth  will  ultimately 
triumph. 

This  testimony  was  taken  in  due  form  at  McCormick- 
Steele's  Tavern,  Augusta  County,  Va.,  McCor-  Hussey 
mick  and  Hussey  both  being  present.    It  is  too     °* 
voluminous  to  copy  entire,  but  we  will  refer 
briefly  to  each,  having  read  them  carefully,  and 
obtained  certified  copies  of  all  from  the  Patent 
office. 

Dr.  N.  M.  Hitt  testified  to  a  reaping  ma- 
chine being  made  by  C.  H.  McCormick  in  1831 
— it  had  a  straight  sickle  blade. 

William  S.  McCormick  and  Leander  J.  Mc- 
Cormick, brothers  of  C.  H.  McCormick,  also 
testified  to  the  making  of  a  machine  in  1831. 

Mary  McCormick,  mother  of  C.  H.  McCor- 
mick, agreed  in  general  with  the  testimony  of 
her  sons, — did  not  doubt  but  it  was  correct, 
"it  appears  familiar  to  me,"  but  testified  to 
nothing  in  particular. 

John    Steele,    Jr.,    was    tavernkeeper    at  Testimony 
"Steele's  Tavern,"  testified  as  to  the  year  being 
1831  or  1832.    In  his  amended  testimony,  ad- 
mitted that  C.  H.  McCormick  wrote  the  paper 
describing  the  machine  for  him  to  testify  to; 

91 


recollects  little  else  about  the  machine  than 
the  straight  sickle  edge. 

Eliza  H.  Steele  refused  to  testify  without 
first  seeing  a  certificate  previously  signed  by 
her;  admitted  that  C.  H.  McCormick  wrote  it 
for  her  to  sign;  her  testimony  as  to  the  year 
depended  on  the  building  of  a  certain  house, 
on  which  the  workmen  put  1831. 

John  McCown — was  a  blacksmith — testified 
that  he  made  the  "straight  sickle  blade,"  and 
that  it  was  "a  long,  straight  sickle"  blade. 

This  was  most  singular  testimony  to  found 
a  claim  of  priority  of  invention  on,  and  by 
which  to  invalidate  another  man's  patent. 
There  was  discrepancy  in  the  evidence  as  to 
the  year  of  the  invention ;  also  whether  the  ma- 
chine was  intended  for  one  or  two  horses ;  how 
the  "fingers"  were  arranged,  and  whether  of 
wood  or  iron,  above  or  below,  the  "straight 
sickle  blade."  Two  of  the  brothers — one  at 
least  who  helped  to  make,  if  not  also  to  invent 
this  machine — testified  that  the  plan  or  ar- 
rangement of  the  machine  here  sworn  to,  was 
changed  in  1840,  1841,  1842,  or  1843,  they  did 
not  know  which;  from  9  to  12  years  after- 
wards! 

John  McCown  swears  positively  that  he 
helped  to  build  the  machine,  so  far  at  least  as 
to  forge  "a  long,  straight  sickle;"  but  neither 
he,  or  a  single  one  of  the  seven  sworn  wit- 

99 


nesses,  "ladies  and  gentlemen,"  testify  that  the 
machine  ever  worked  a  single  hour,  or  cut  as 
much  grain  of  any  kind  as  would  make  a  single 
sheaf!* 

In  a  long  communication  to  Commissioner 
Burke  in  1848,  together  with  a  list  of  sales  and 
profits,  C.  H.  McCormick  states,  and  on  oath, 
that  he  had  exhibited  his  machine  in  1840  or 
1841  to  a  considerable  number  of  farmers  and 
very  satisfactorily,  though  but  one  person 
could  be  induced  to  purchase — a  Mr.  John 
Smith  we  believe — and  that  up  to  1842,  eleven  smith" 
years  after  the  alleged  invention,  he  had  sold 
but  two  machines,  and  one  of  them  condition- 
ally. Again,  in  the  same  paper  he  states,  "but 
they  failed  to  operate  well,"  and  had  to  be 
altered — in  other  words  they  would  not  work 
at  all.  Amongst  others,  he  had  applied  to  "the 


*  The  reading  of  this  testimony  strongly  reminds  us  of  an 
anecdote  related  at  the  hustings  in  Virginia  by  that  talented  but 
eccentric  character,  John  Randolph,  of  Roanoake,  in  a  political 
canvass  with  an  opponent,  who  promised  what  he  would  do  for 
his  constituents,  if  elected.  Randolph  told  him  he  was  like  one 
of  his  overseers,  a  plausible  fellow,  but  on  whom  little  reliance 
was  to  be  placed — and  who,  desiring  to  show  what  fine  crops 
he  had  raised,  exhibited  a  better  tally  board  than  the  crop  could 
justify.  "I  told  him,"  said  Randolph,  "this  is  very  good  tally, 
John,  but  where's  the  corn?  and  I  tell  the  gentleman,  I  don't 
want  to  see  his  tally,  but  the  corn — the  evidence  of  what  he 
ever  did  to  entitle  him  to  a  seat  in  Congress."  The  effect  was 
electric,  and  the  hustings  rang  with  plaudits.  Now  we  would 
say  to  C.  H.  McCormick,  this  is  very  good  tally,  John,  but 
where's  the  Corn?  The  evidence  that  the  machine  ever  cut  a 
single  acre  of  grain. 


farmer  of  Virginia,  Mr.  Sampson,"  for  a  certifi- 
cate as  to  the  satisfactory  working  of  the  ma- 
chine, but  it  was  declined. 

We  are  not  surprised  at  this;  for  some  35 
years  ago  we  were  personally  acquainted  with 
this  "farmer  of  Virginia,"  and  also  with  his 
mode  of  farming ;  and  know  that  a  machine  of 
any  kind  to  please  him  must  work  and  must 
also  work  "well."  Richard  Sampson  was  at 
that  early  day  in  this  "age  of  progress,"  one  of 
the  best  and  most  practical  farmers  in  the  "Old 
Dominion,"  and  was  not  a  man  to  be  "caught 
napping,"  either  at  home  or  abroad. 

The  record  shows  that  "on  March  29,  1848, 
the  Board  met  agreeably  to  adjournment — 
Present,  James  Buchanan,  Secretary  of  State, 
Edmund  Burke,  Commissioner  of  Patents,  and 
R.  H.  Gillett,  Solicitor  of  the  Treasury— and 
having  examined  the  evidence  adduced  in  the 
case  decide  that  said  patent  ought  not  to  be 
extended." 

(Signed)     "JAMES   BUCHANAN, 

"Secretary  of  State, 
"EDMUND  BURKE, 

"Commissioner  of  Patents. 
"R.  H.  GILLETT, 

"Solicitor  of  the  Treasury." 

This  evidence,  taken  in  due  form,  and  certi- 
fied to  by  the  magistrates  in  Augusta  and  Rock- 
bridge  Counties,  Virginia,  was  not  ruled  out  as 

94 


informal,  as  we  have  seen  it  stated :  but  it  was 
certainly  laid  before  the  Board ;  and  was  doubt- 
less satisfactory  both  as  to  priority  of  inven- 
tion, and  in  connection  with  Dr.  Page's  report, 
conclusive,  "that  said  patent  ought  not  to  be 
extended." 

We  have  also  seen  it  stated  that  Hussey 
appeared  before  the  Board  of  Extensions  "to 
contest  the  extension  of  McCormick's  patent." 

We  think  injustice — and  no  doubt  uninten- 
tionally— is  here  done  to  Hussey.  Until  the 
order  of  the  Board  was  passed  to  afford  him  the 
opportunity  to  defend  his  rights,  assailed  with- 
out his  knowledge,  he  was  not  aware  of  C.  H. 
McCormick's  application.  As  a  matter  of  Mr.  Hussey 
course  he  then  attended,  but  stated  in  writing,  Acted  in 

^*»         " 

and  which  is  now  on  file,  "I  had  no  intention,  " 
neither  had  I  any  desire  to  place  any  obstacle 
in  the  way  of  the  extension  of  C.  H.  McCor- 
mick's patent.  But  the  course  he  has  taken 
before  your  Board  and  before  Congress  has 
compelled  me  to  act  in  self  defense." 

Not  so  with  C.  H.  McCormick;  for  when  his 
claims  were  rejected  by  the  Board  of  Exten- 
sions,— and  most  justly,  as  we  think,  in  accord- 

McCormick 

ance  with  the  evidence — he  petitioned  Con-  A 
gress  against  Hussey's  extension:  and  to  this  t],e  Hussey 
most  ungenerous,  illiberal  and  unfair  course,  Extension 
and  of  which  Hussey  was  for  years  totally  ig- 
norant, C.  H.  McCormick  may  justly  attribute 
85 


this  enquiry; — but  for  this,  it  had  never  been 
written.  Our  object  is  not  to  injure  C.  H.  Mc- 
Cormick;  but  it  is  that  justice  may  be  done  to 
another,  whose  interests  and  rights  he  was  the 
first  to  assail. 

If  the  foregoing  testimony  is  not  conclusive, 
as  regards  priority  of  invention  in  1831  against 
C.  H.  McCormick,  we  think  the  evidence  which 
follows — and  which  no  one  will  pretend  to  call 
in  question,  or  doubt— establishes  the  fact  that 
the  machine  of  1831  was  good  for  nothing, — 
not  even  half  invented;  and  that  the  machine 
of  1841  was  not  much  more  perfect. 

On  page  231  of  the  Reports  of  Juries  for 
the  Great  London  Exhibition,  and  now  in  the 
Library  of  Congress,  we  find  the  following: 

"It  seems  right,"  says  Philip  Pusey,  Esq., 
M.  P.,  "to  put  on  record  Mr.  McCormick's  own 
account  of  his  progress,  or  some  extracts  at 
least,  from  a  statement  written  by  him,  at  my 
request." — [Pusey.] 

"My  father  was  a  farmer  in  the  county  of 
Rockbridge,  State  of  Virginia,  United  States. 
He  made  an  experiment  in  cutting  grain  in  the 
year  1816,  by  a  number  of  cylinders  standing 
perpendicularly.  Another  experiment  of  the 
same  kind  was  made  by  my  father  in  the  har- 
vest of  1831,  which  satisfied  my  father  to  aban- 
don it.  Thereupon  my  attention  was  directed 
to  the  subject,  and  the  same  harvest  I  invented 

96 


and  put  in  operation  in  cutting  late  oats  on  the 
farm  of  John  Steele,  adjoining  my  father's, 
those  parts  of  my  present  Reaper  called  the 
platform,  for  receiving  the  corn,  a  straight 
blade  taking  effect  on  the  corn,  supported  by 
stationary  fingers  over  the  edge,  and  a  reel  to 
gather  the  corn;  which  last,  however,  I  found 
had  been  used  before,  though  not  in  the  same 
combination. 

"Although  these  parts  constituted  the  foun- 
dation of  the  present  machine,  I  found  in  prac- 
tice innumerable  difficulties,  being  limited  also 
to  a  few  weeks  each  year,  during  the  harvest, 
for  experimenting,  so  that  my  first  patent  for 
the  Reaper  was  granted  in  June,  1834. 

"During  this  interval,  /  was  often  advised 
by  my  father  and  family  to  abandon  it,  and 
pursue  my  regular  business,  as  likely  to  be 
more  profitable,  he  having  given  me  a  farm. 
[Italicised  by  C.  H.  McC.] 

"No  machines  were  sold  until  1840,  and  I 
may  say  that  they  were  not  of  much  practical 
value  until  the  improvements  of  my  second 
patent  in  1845. 

"These  improvements  consist  in  reversing 
the  angle  of  the  sickle  teeth  alternately — the 
improved  form  of  the  fingers  to  hold  up  the 
corn,  etc. — an  iron  case  to  preserve  the  sickles 
from  clogging — and  a  better  mode  of  separat- 
ing the  standing  corn  to  be  cut.  Up  to  this 

97 


period  nothing  but  loss  of  time  and  money  re- 
sulted from  my  efforts.  The  sale  has  since 
steadily  increased,  and  is  now  more  than  a 
thousand  yearly."* 

It  would  be  just  as  conclusive  and  reason- 
able for  the  father  of  C.  H.  McCormick  to  claim 
at  this  day  priority  of  invention  for  his  Reaper 
invented  in  1816,  "by  a  number  of  cylinders 
standing  perpendicularly;"  or  for  "the  inven- 
tion made  by  my  father  in  the  harvest  of  1831, 
which  satisfied  my  father  to  abandon  it."  This 
authority,  high  and  official  as  all  must  admit 
it  to  be,  [and  italicised  too,  by  the  writer  for  a 
particular  object,]  clearly  proves  that  the  in- 
vention of  1831  was  an  abortion ;  for  if  the  prin- 
ciple was  effective  to  cut  one  acre  of  grain 
properly,  any  man  of  common  sense  knows  that 
it  was  equally  so  to  cut  one  thousand  acres; 


*  "The  sale  has  since  steadily  increased,  and  is  now  more 
than  a  thousand  yearly."  This  was  written  in  1851,  and  by  a 
little  calculation,  we  can  readily  estimate  the  "yearly"  profits. 
In  the  Circuit  Court  of  the  United  States,  at  Albany,  in  the 
suit  brought  by  C.  H.  McCormick  against  Seymour  &  Morgan, 
in  1850,  for  an  alleged  infringement  of  patent,  it  was  proved  on 
the  oath  of  O.  H.  Dormon,  his  partner,  and  also  on  the  oath  of 
H.  A.  Blakesley,  their  clerk,  that  these  Reapers  only  cost  $36 
to  $37  to  manufacture.  By  the  same  evidence,  the  sales  aver- 
aged from  $110  to  $120  each  machine;  leaving  a  clear  profit  of 
at  least  $73.  C.  H.  McCormick  first  received  a  patent  fee  of 
$30  on  each  machine,  then  three-fourths  of  the  remainder  in  the 
division  of  profits.  It  would  thus  appear,  if  these  figures  are 
correct — and  they  are  all  sworn  to— that  C.  H.  McCormick 
realized  full  fifty  thousand  dollars  clear  profit  annually,  with  a 
margin  of  eight  to  ten  thousand  dollars  for  commissions  and 
bad  debts  in  addition. 

98 


but  so  complete  was  the  failure  that,  "During 
this  interval" — between  1831  and  1834 — "/  was 
often  advised  by  my  father  and  family  to 
abandon  it,  and  pursue  my  regular  business, 
as  likely  to  be  more  profitable,  he  having 
given  me  a  farm." 

Again,  "No  machines  were  sold  until  1840, 
and  I  may  say  that  they  were  not  of  much  prac- 
tical value  until  the  improvements  of  my  sec- 
ond patent  in  1845."  What  these  improve- 
ments were  we  are  also  informed:  "These  im- 
provements consist  in  reversing  the  angle  of 
the  sickle  teeth  alternately,  the  improved  form 
of  the  fingers  to  hold  up  the  corn,  etc. — an  iron 
case  to  preserve  the  sickle  from  clogging,  etc. — 
up  to  this  period  nothing  but  loss  of  time  and 
money  resulted  from  my  efforts." 

Nor  is  it  at  all  surprising ;  for  until  improve- 
ments were  added,  invented  and  long  in  suc- 
cessful operation  by  others,  the  machine  would 
not  work,  and  consequently  no  one  would  buy. 

This  letter  is  the  most  perfect  and  complete 
estopper  to  priority  of  invention — not  only  for 
1831,  but  to  1841  inclusive,  if  not  to  1845,  that 
could  be  penned.     His  pen  cuts  a  "cleaner  McCormick's 
swath,"  as  we  farmers  say,  than  ever  did  his  Pen  More 
Reaper ;  and  this  letter  at  least  is  certainly  C.  „.  "* lve 
H.  McCormick's  own  "invention,"  which  no 
one  else  can  lay  any  claim  to.    Yet,  strange  as 
it  may  appear,  he  contended  before  the  Board 

99 


of  Extensions  in  order  to  invalidate  Hussey's 
Patent,  that  he  invented  a  Reaping  Machine 
nine  years  before!  So  has  perpetual  motion 
been  invented  a  hundred  times — in  the  estima- 
tion of  the  projectors ;  and  by  his  own  showing, 
and  on  oath,  he  sold  but  two  machines  up  to 
1842— one  of  them  conditionally  sold — being 
eleven  years  after  the  alleged  invention,  and 
even  they  had  to  be  re-invented  to  make  them 
work,  or  use  the  previous  inventions  of  others. 

In  this  letter  to  Philip  Pusey,  Esq.,  M.  P., 
C.  H.  McCormick  admits  that  the  Reel  "had 
been  used  before,"  yet  he  includes  it  in  his 
patent  of  1834. — Both  the  specifications  and 
drawings  in  the  Patent  Office  conclusively  es- 
tablish the  fact  that  James  Ten  Eyck  patented 
the  reel  or  "revolving  rack,"  or  "revolving 
frame"  in  1825,  used  not  only  to  gather  the 
grain  as  all  such  devices  are  used,  but  by  the 
knives  attached  to  it,  also  intended  to  cut  it  off. 

Could  it  be  contended  that  because  rockers 
are  attached  to  a  chair  it  is  no  longer  a  chair, 
or  useful  as  a  seat?  Even  "Mary  McCormick, 
the  mother  of  Cyrus,"  and  "Eliza  H.  Steele,  of 
Steele's  Tavern,  Virginia" — nay  every  woman 
and  child  in  the  country  would  tell  you  that  it 
was  then  a  rocking  chair — just  as  much  a  seat 
as  ever — and  Ten  Eyck's  was  a  Reel  to  all  in- 
tents and  purposes,  but  also  a  cutting  reel.  It 
does  not  require  the  mechanical  tact  and  skill 
100 


of  Professor  Page  to  discover  that  "the  revolv- 
ing rack  presents  novelty  chiefly  in  form,  as  its 
operation  is  similar  to  the  revolving  frame  of 
James  Ten  Eyck,  patented  November  2d,  1825." 
It  is  certain  the  reel  was  no  "novelty,"  either  in 
1831  or  1834,  when  patented  by  C.  H.  McCor-  Priority 
mick ;  he  tells  us  so  himself ;  and  it  is  most  of  the  Red 
likely  the  father  of  C.  H.  McCormick  also  used 
a  reel  for  his  "cylinders  standing  perpendicu- 
larly, in  1816,"  and  also  for  his  other  plan  in 
1831,  and  "which  satisfied  my  father  to  aban- 
don it."  And  it  is  equally  probable  that  most 
of  the  "fathers"  and  the  sons,  who  invented 
Reapers  for  a  hundred  years  preceding  the  date 
of  Hussey's  patent,  used  reels ; — indeed  the  reel 
seemed  to  be  considered  a  Sine  qua  non  by 
many ;  most  of  the  inventors  we  have  any  clear 
account  of,  resorted  to  the  reel. 

Hussey  also  used  the  reel  in  1833 — of  course 
the  reel  and  seat  in  combination — but  only  for 
a  short  period,  as  it  was  found  quite  unneces- 
sary— an  actual  incumbrance  with  his  cutting 
apparatus,  and  soon  laid  it  aside. 

We  will  now  examine  another  invention 
patented  by  C.  H.  McCormick,  in  1847.  We 
here  assert  and  challenge  a  denial,  that  from 
12  to  14  years  after  the  alleged  invention  of  a 
Reaper  by  C.  H.  McCormick  in  1831,  and  from 
9  to  12  years  after  the  date  of  his  patent  in  1834 
his  raker  walked  by  the  side  of  his  machine, 
101 


while  Hussey's  raker  rode  on  the  machine  as 
they  always  had  done  since  his  first  machine 
that  cut  the  grain  like  "a  thing  of  life"  in  Ham- 
ilton County,  Ohio,  in  1833.  Yet,  in  1847,  C.  H. 
McCormick  takes  out  a  patent  for  the  raker's 
seat!  this  was  a  "novelty"  and  well  worth  a 
patent ! 

In  two  trials  of  reaping  machines  by  Hus- 
sey  and  McCormick  in  the  same  fields  in  Vir- 

_     ginia,  in  1843,  one  at  Hutchinson's,  and  the 
me 

Raker's  ot"er  on  tne  plantation  of  the  late  Senator 
Seat  Roane,  at  Tree  Hill,  near  Richmond,  McCor- 
mick's  raker  walked  by  the  side  of  the  machine, 
while  Hussey's  rode  on  the  machine,  in  the 
same  manner  as  he  did  just  exactly  ten  years 
before. 

We  have  three  letters  from  the  late  Hon. 
William  H.  Roane  referring  to  these  trials,  and 
ordering  a  machine  from  Hussey,  after  witness- 
ing the  operation  of  both.  Two  of  the  letters 
he  desired  might  not  be  published ;  but  says  in 
one  of  them,  "I  have  no  objection  to  your  stat- 
ing publicly  that  a  member  of  the  committee 
who  made  the  report  last  summer  at  Hutchin- 
son's, which  was  published  a  few  days  there- 
after, witnessed  a  fuller  and  fairer  trial  between 
the  two  machines,  and  has  in  consequence 
ordered  one  of  yours.  *  *  *  What  I  have 

said  above  of is  intended  only  for  your  eye 

confidentially,  to  show  you  in  part  the  charac- 
102 


ter  and  probable  motives  of  the  opposition  your 
Reaper  has  met.  Let  what  I  say  be  private,  as 
I  have  a  great  objection  to  going  into  the  news- 
papers. Should  you  ever  want  it,  you  can  have 
from  me  the  strongest  public  testimonial  of 
my  good  opinion  of  your  machine." 

The  third  letter,  giving  this  "testimonial," 
was  published  in  the  American  Farmer  in  Jan- 
uary, 1844.  As  the  Raker's  Seat — the  main 
feature  of  C.  H.  McCormick's  patent  of  1847 — 
comes  fairly  within  the  scope  of  this  enquiry 
as  to  priority  of  invention,  we  re-publish  Sen- 
ator Roane's  letter  and  also  furnish  other  testi- 
mony on  the  subject. 

"To  the  Editor  of  the  American  Farmer: 

"As  the  question  of  which  is  the  best  Reap- 
ing Machine  is  of  no  little  importance  to  wheat 
growers,  it  is  highly  necessary  that  they  be 
rightly  informed  of  every  fact  which  tends  to 
decide  the  question.  The  trial  which  forms  the 
subject  of  the  following  correspondence  was 
looked  forward  to  with  great  interest  by  farm- 
ers ;  such  was  the  partial  character  of  the  trial, 
and  the  general  terms  of  the  committee's  re- 
port, in  which  the  particulars  that  led  to  the 
result  were  omitted,  it  cannot  appear  strange 
that  the  public  should  be  in  some  degree  misled 
with  regard  to  the  relative  merits  of  the  two 
machines.  If  my  own  interest  was  alone  con- 

103 


cerned,  I  would  not  thus  far  trespass  on  your 
columns,  but  you  will  doubtless  agree  with  me, 
that  it  is  due  to  wheat  growers  throughout  the 
country  that  the  views  expressed  by  Mr.  Roane, 
in  connection  with  the  committee's  report, 
should  be  published  as  extensively  as  the  re- 
port itself;  I  therefore  solicit  the  insertion  of 
the  following  correspondence  in  your  paper. 
"Very  respectfully, 

"OBED  HUSSEY." 

"Baltimore,  January  18th,  1844. 

"To  the  Hon.  William  H.  Roane: 

"Dear  Sir — You  will  remember  that  a  trial 
took  place  on  the  farm  of  Mr.  Hutchinson  near 
Richmond,  Va.,  in  July  last,  between  my  reap- 
ing machine  and  Mr.  McCormick's,  at  which 
trial  you  were  one  of  a  committee  which  gave 
H  the  preference  to  Mr.  McCormick's  machine. 

Letter  to         "You  will  also  recollect  that  the  machine 
Mr.  Roane  which  I  used  at  that  time  was  a  small  one,  and 
quite  different  from  that  which  I  used  in  your 
field  a  few  days  afterwards  in  a  second  trial  be- 
tween Mr.  McCormick  and  myself. 

"As  the  first  trial  was  made  under  circum- 
stances unfavorable  to  myself,  owing  to  the 
difficulties  which  prevented  me  from  getting 
my  best  machine  to  the  field  on  that  day,  and 
other  impediments  incidental  to  a  stranger  un- 

104 


provided  with  a  team,  etc.,  and  as  no  report 
was  made  of  the  second  trial,  you  will  oblige 
me  by  informing  me  what  your  impressions 
were  after  witnessing  the  second  trial. 

"I  would  very  gladly  embrace  the  opportu- 
nity which  the  next  harvest  will  afford  of  fol- 
lowing up  my  experiments  in  wheat  cutting  in 
Virginia,  but  the  new  field  opened  to  me  in  the 
great  west  for  cutting  hemp,  in  which  I  was  so 
successful  last  September,  as  will  appear  by 
the  Louisville  'Journal'  of  that  date,  will  claim 
my  particular  attention  this  year.  I  mention 
this  to  you  lest  it  might  appear  that  I  had 
abandoned  the  field  in  Virginia  by  my  non- 
appearance  there  in  the  next  harvest. 

"Very  respectfully  yours,  etc., 
"OBED  HUSSEY." 

"Tree  Hill,  January  23d,  1844. 
"Dear  Sir: 

"I  received  a  few  days  ago  your  letter  of  the 
17th  inst.,  on  the  subject  of  your  reaping  ma- 
chine; you  call  my  recollection  to  a  trial  be-  . 

J  Mr.  Roane  s 

tween  it  and  Mr.  McCormick's  reaper  at  Mr.  Repiy 
Hutchinson's  in  July  last,  on  which  occasion 
I  'was  one  of  a  committee  which  gave  the 
preference  to  Mr.  McCormick's  machine;'  you 
also  advert  to  a  tr,ial  between  these  rival  ma- 
chines a  few  days  subsequent,  at  this  place,  and 
request  to  know  my  impressions  after  this 

105 


second  trial.  I  presume  from  the  fact  of  my 
having  ordered  one  of  your  reapers  for  the  en- 
suing harvest,  that  it  is  your  purpose  to  pub- 
lish this  statement.  Averse  as  I  am  to  having 
my  name  in  print  on  this,  or  any  other  occa- 
sion, I  cannot  with  propriety  decline  a  response 
to  your  inquiry.  I  had  never  seen  or  formed 
an  idea  of  a  reaping  machine  until  I  went  to 
Hutchinson's — I  was  surprised  and  delighted 
with  the  performance  of  each  of  them,  and  fully 
resolved  to  own  one  of  them  by  the  next 
harvest,  but  their  performance  that  day  left  me 
in  a  state  of  doubt  which  I  should  select.  The 
report  spoke  in  terms  of  high  praise  of  each  ma- 
chine, and  I  consented  to  its  award  that  on  the 
whole  Mr.  McCormick's  was  preferable,  mere- 
ly because  being  the  cheapest  and  requiring 
but  two  horses,  it  would  best  suit  the  majority 
of  our  farmers,  who  make  small  crops  of  wheat 
on  weak  land — for  I  doubted  its  capacity  in 
heavy  grain.  After  this  report  was  made  I 
heard  your  complaint  that  you  did  not  have  a 
fair  trial,  because  being  unable  to  bring  into 
the  field  your  large  improved  Reaper,  which 
was  up  the  river,  you  were  compelled  to  com- 
ply with  your  engagement  for  the  day,  with  a 
small  and  inferior  machine,  drawn  by  an  in- 
different and  untutored  team.  Mr.  Hutchin- 
son's wheat  was  badly  rusted,  and  therefore 

106 


light.  I  had  ready  for  the  scythe  a  low  ground 
field  of  heavy  and  well  matured  grain;  partly 
to  expedite  my  harvest  work,  and  partly  to 
renew  the  trial,  that  I  might  solve  my  doubts 
as  to  the  merits  of  these  machines,  I  succeeded 
in  engaging  them  to  be  at  Tree  Hill  on  a  named 
day.  They  both  came  agreeable  to  appoint- 
ment, Mr.  McCormick  bringing  the  machine  he 
used  at  Hutchinson's,  and  you  bringing  the 
one  you  could  not  on  that  occasion  bring  down 
the  river.  The  day  was  fine,  and  both  ma- 
chines did  their  best,  and  had  a  very  fair  trial. 
My  doubts  were  fully  removed,  and  my  mind 
convinced  that  for  the  heavy  wheat  we  raise 
on  our  river  low  grounds,  rich  bottoms,  etc., 
your  machine  is  superior  to  Mr.  McCormick's, 
of  which  I  still  think  highly.  I  accordingly 
ordered  one  of  yours  to  be  made  for  the  ap- 
proaching harvest. 

"I  wish  you  all  possible  success  in  cutting 
hemp  in  the  'Great  West.'  It  must  be  very 
desirable  to  cut  that  valuable  plant  instead  of 
pulling  it  up  by  the  roots,  and  I  cannot  doubt 
that  your  reaper  has  ample  power  for  the  pro- 
cess. 

"Most  respectfully,  yours,  etc., 

"W.  H.  ROANE. 
"Mr.  Obed  Hussey,  Baltimore." 

107 


"We  are  not  advised  at  what  precise  period 
subsequent  to  1843  and  previous  to  1847  (when 
C.  H.  McCormick  patented  the  raker's  seat), 
that  he  changed  the  arrangement  of  his  wheels, 
etc.,  so  as  to  admit  a  seat  for  his  raker  with- 
out 'tipping  up  the  machine'  as  was  unavoid- 
able previously.  From  evidence  deemed  fully 
reliable,  he  was  not  the  first  even  on  his  own 
machine,  to  provide  a  seat  for  the  raker,  "and 
all  take  a  ride.'  It  is  laborious  enough  to  test 
fully  the  endurance  of  the  most  powerful  and 
muscular  man,  to  ride  and  rake;  but  to  walk 
and  rake  is  even  more  barbarous  than  the  old 
time  ball  and  chain  to  the  leg  of  the  felon.  The 
considerate  and  feeling  farmer  would  certainly 
*wait  for  the  wagon*  to  be  better  fixed  before 
thus  undertaking  to  reap  his  grain  fields  if 
himself  or  his  hands  had  to  ride  in  this  sort  of 
style. 

"We  have  a  letter  from  Isaac  Irvine  Kite, 
Esq.,  now  of  Clarke  County,  Va.,  which  throws 
some  light  on  the  subject;  he  says  (italicised 
by  the  writer) : 

"In  1842  my  father,  by  my  request,  pur- 
chased for  me  of  C.  H.  McCormick  and  Father, 
a  reaper  at  $110,  which  was  drawn  by  two 
horses,  and  it  was  raked  off  to  the  right  hand 
side  by  a  man  on  foot.  The  father  of  C.  H.  Mc- 
Cormick stated  to  me  at  the  commencement  of 
that  harvest,  that  it  had  been  nine  years  since 

108 


they  had  first  operated  with  it,  in  pretty  much 
the  form  it  was  then  constructed.  On  a  recent 
visit  to  Messrs.  McCormick,  who  then  resided 
on  the  line  between  Augusta  and  Rockbridge 
Counties  in  this  State,  the  old  gentleman  stated 
to  me  that  he  had  been  at  odd  times  at  work 
on  the  reaper  for  many  years ;  and  either  he  or 
his  son  stated  to  me  that  C.  H.  McCormick  had 
been  improving,  changing  or  inventing  vari- 
ous parts  until  they  had  (as  they  thought)  per- 
fected the  machine.  *  *  *  I  disliked  the 
labor  imposed  on  the  hand  who  had  to  walk 
and  remove  the  wheat  from  a  platform  seven 
feet  in  width,  and  urged  Messrs.  McCormick  to 
attach  another  contrivance  so  as  to  enable  the 
raker  to  ride  and  perform  his  arduous  task ;  the 
old  gentleman  contended  that  that  could  never 
be  accomplished,  but  that  a  self-operating  ap- 
pendage could  be  constructed  to  remove  the 
grain,  but  that  would  be  uncertain,  and  entirely 
unreliable.  During  my  visit,  he  pointed  out  to 
me  one  or  more  fixtures  they  had  tried  for  the 
raker  to  ride  on.  I  think  one  was  on  one  wheel, 
and  the  other  on  two. 

I  yet  contended  that  it  could  be  accom- 
plished ;  if  by  no  other  means,  by  changing  the 
construction  of  the  machine,  and  remarked  to  Mr>  H;te 
him,  if  I  were  a  mechanic,  and  understood  the  Suggests 
construction  of  the  machine  well  enough  to  »  S*at 
venture  to  alter  its  parts,  I  was  certain  I  could 

109 


so  arrange  it,  and  requested  him  to  urge  his 
son  to  make  the  effort ;  he  replied  that  it  would 
be  useless;  that  they  had  tried  every  imagina- 
ble way  or  plan  before  placing  the  machine 
before  the  public,  and  that  they  regarded  it  as 
an  impossibility,  successfully,  and  properly,  in 
any  other  way  than  on  foot,  and  said  it  was 
necessary  for  the  heads  to  be  brought  round 
to  the  right,  in  which  I  fully  agreed;  but  con- 
tended it  could  be  done  while  the  raker  was 
riding  or  standing  in  an  erect  position. 

After  this  unsatisfactory  interview  I  re- 
turned home,  and  at  the  close  of  the  next  wheat 
harvest  I  had  a  small  carriage,  about  3  feet  by 
3%  feet,  constructed  on  two  wheels,  and  con- 
nected underneath  the  platform,  by  means  of 

McCormick    ghafts  tQ  ^  back  t  Qf  ^  hea(j  Qf  ^  ma_ 

Condemns      ....  .  .  . 

chine;  this  during  the  cutting  of  my  oat  crop 

answered  every  purpose,  so  far  as  the  raker 
was  concerned,  but  there  was  a  difficulty  in 
turning.  C.  H.  McCormick  came  to  see  this 
combination  sometime  during  the  year,  and 
condemned  it  in  toto.  But  by  the  next  harvest 
I  had  it  so  constructed,  as  to  be  drawn  by  an 
iron  bar  so  shaped,  appended  and  supported 
on  the  underneath  part  of  the  carriage,  as  to 
admit  of  the  machine  turning  in  any  direction, 
and  the  carriage  would  follow  just  as  the  two 
hind  wheels  of  a  wagon  do;  the  carriage  had 
a  seat  behind,  and  a  thick,  deep  cushion  in 
110 


front,  for  the  raker  to  press  his  knees  against 
while  removing  the  grain  from  the  platform  to 
his  right  hand,  which  he  was  enabled  to  do 
with  apparent  ease  with  a  rake  of  peculiar 
shape; — (it  cannot  be  done  with  a  rake  of  ordi- 
nary shape). 

The  working  of  the  first  carriage  was  wit- 
nessed by  many  gentlemen  who  approved  of  it ; 
and  the  combination  of  the  second  carriage  I 
applied  for  a  patent  for.  The  model  carriage 
can  now  be  seen  in  the  room  of  the  Patent  McCormich 
Office,  containing  models  of  all  rejected  pat-  ^do?!f  , 

.  r  .  .      _  .  Mr.  Hite  s 

ents.  After  this,  I  heard  of  McCormick  mak- 
ing  experiments  at  one  of  his  Western  fac- 
tories— I  think  it  was  at  Chicago;  and  finally 
he  addressed  me  a  letter,  stating  he  had 
changed  the  construction  of  his  machine,  and 
had  it  so  constructed  that  the  raker  could  ride 
on  the  machine  and  remove  the  grain." 

We  think  the  foregoing  letter — for  it  car- 
ries truth  on  its  face— clearly  shows  that  the 
idea  of  "changing  the  construction  of  the  ma- 
chine," and  permit  the  raker  to  ride,  did  not 
originate  with  the  McCormick's  father  or  son; 
for  "they  had  tried  every  imaginable  plan  or 
way  before  placing  the  machine  before  the  pub- 
lic, and  that  they  regarded  it  as  an  impossibil- 
ity for  the  wheat  to  be  so  removed  regularly, 
successfully  and  properly,  in  any  other  way  ex- 
cept on  foot." 

ill 


At  the  trial  referred  to  at  Hutchinson's,  and 
the  late  Senator  Roane's  in  1843,  it  was  demon- 
strated that  a  raker  could  ride  and  rake,  and  as 
was  also  done  by  Hussey  many  years  before, 
at  various  places,  and  delivering  the  grain  at 
back  or  side.  But  we  have  still  better  evi- 
dence than  the  above — C.  H.  McCormick  him- 
self. 

His  Patent  of  1847,  covering  some  four  or 
five  folio  pages,  is  altogether  to  change  "the 
construction  of  the  machine,"  to  admit  of,  and 
to  patent  the  raker's  seat ;  the  substance  of  the 
whole  is  comprised  within  the  following  brief 
extract  from  the  patent  of  1847 : 

"And  the  gearing  which  communicates  mo- 
tion to  the  crank  is  placed  back  of  the  driving 
wheel,  which  is  therefore  subject  to  be  clogged 
by  sand,  dirt,  straw,  etc. — and  in  consequence 
McCormick's  Qf  t^e  re]atjve  position  of  the  various  parts, 

Raker's  tne  atten^ant  is  obliged  to  walk  on  the 
Seat  ground  by  the  side  of  the  machine,  to  rake 
the  cut  grain  from  the  platform  as  it  is  deliv- 
ered and  laid  there  by  the  reel.  These  defects 
which  have  so  much  retarded  the  introduction 
into  practical  and  general  use  of  Reaping  Ma- 
chines, I  have  remedied  by  my  improvements, 
the  nature  of  which  consists  in  placing  the  driv- 
ing wheels  further  back  than  heretofore,  and 
back  of  the  gearing  which  communicates  mo- 
tion to  the  sickle,  which  is  placed  in  a  line  back 
112 


of  the  axis  of  the  driving  wheel,  the  connexion 
being  formed,  etc.,  and  also  bringing  the  driv- 
ing wheel  sufficiently  far  back  to  balance  the 
frame  of  the  machine  with  the  raker  on  it,  to 
make  room  for  him  to  sit  or  stand  on  the 
frame,"  etc.,  etc. — "which  cannot  be  done,  if 
the  raker  walks  by  the  side  of  the  machine,  as 
heretofore." 

Now  if  C.  H.  McCormick's  testimony  in  his 
own  favor,  can  be  considered  reliable,  he  eer-  Hnssey 
tainly  had  not  invented  a  seat  for  his  raker  as  Fourteen 
late  as  1845 — and  not  long  prior  to  1847,  when  Years 

A  L.         J 

he  patented  it;  and  just  fourteen  years  after 
Hussey  had  used  it  every  year,  successively. 
The  raker's  seat  therefore  was  just  as  original 
an  invention  as  the  reel. 

The  "straight  sickle  blade,"  but  cut  one 
way  only,  and  abandoned  some  10  or  12  years 
after  its  conception  in  1831,  as  he  states,  ap- 
pears to  be  the  only  original  idea — properly 
belonging  to  whom  it  may — in  the  patent  of 
1834.  As  to  the  "foundation"  of  the  machine, 
viz : — the  platform,  cog  wheels,  crank,  etc.,  etc., 
they  have  been  used  by  every  projector  in 
reaping  machines,  for  a  century. 

A  machine  exhibited  at  the  World's  Fair 
in  London,  by  C.  H.  McCormick,  had  the 
"straight  sickle  blade,"  but  alternating  the  cuts 
every  few  inches.  With  such  a  machine  it  is 
impracticable  to  cut  grain,  much  less  grass, 
us 


efficiently,  divested  of  the  reel.  That  plan  has 
since  been  changed  to  a  much  more  efficient 
blade,  the  scolloped  edged  sickle.  That  it  was 
used  in  the  Northwestern  States  by  others  sev- 
eral years  previous  to  its  adoption  by  C.  H. 
McCormick,  we  believe  admits  of  just  as  little 
doubt,  as  rests  with  the  priority  of  invention  of 
the  Reel,  Rakers-seat,  etc. 

There  is  one  other  important  feature,  pat- 
ented in  1845  and  referred  to  in  the  Pusey  let- 
ter ; — an  "Iron  case  to  preserve  the  sickles  from 
clogging;"  these  we  will  also  take  a  look  into 
after  a  while. 

Obed  Hussey,  as  appears  by  the  evidence 
before  us,  made  his  first  machine  in  Cincin- 
nati, Ohio,  where  he  then  resided,  in  the  spring 
of  1833,  and  it  was  patented  the  same  year. 
The  Hussey  His  principle — the  arrangement  and  con- 
Prmciple  struction  of  the  Guards  and  Knives — was  pre- 
cisely identical  with  those  used  by  him  at  the 
present  day,  except  an  improvement  patented 
in  1847,  leaving  openings  at  the  back  end  of  the 
slot  in  the  guards  for  the  escape  of  particles  of 
straw  or  grass  that  might  get  in  between  the 
blades  and  guards. 

It  was  communicated  at  the  time  by  letter 
with  a  diagram  to  a  personal  friend  now  living, 
and  of  the  highest  respectability,  from  whom 
we  have  a  certificate,  and  copy  of  the  drawing. 
The  knives  or  cutters,  for  lack  of  more  suitable 

114 


materials  were  made  out  of  hand  saw  blades 
cut  into  suitable  form,  and  riveted  to  a  bar, 
vibrating  through  an  opening  or  slot  in  the 
guards. 

Judge  Foster,  residing  within  a  few  miles 
of  the  city,  and  to  whom  he  applied,  kindly 
offered  him  every  facility  to  test  the  machine 
by  cutting  grain,  ripe  and  unripe,  being  him- 
self greatly  interested  in  its  success.  When 
taken  to  the  field,  a  considerable  number  of 
persons  were  attracted  to  the  spot;  and  rather 
to  the  discomfiture  of  the  inventor,  for  it  may 
well  be  supposed  it  was  an  anxious  moment  * 
to  him,  and  he  desired  no  witnesses  to  his  fail- 
ure. The  machine  was  started;  but  owing  to 
some  part  giving  away,  or  some  slight  defect 
not  apparent  until  then,  it  failed  to  work  satis- 
factorily. One  burley  fellow  present  picked 
up  a  cradle,  and,  swinging  it  with  an  air  of 
great  exultation,  exclaimed,  "this  is  the  ma- 
chine to  cut  the  wheat!" 

After  the  jeers  and  merriment  of  the  crowd 
had  somewhat  subsided,  the  inventor  remedied 
the  defect,  and  assisted  by  the  laborers  present 
— the  horses  having  been  removed — pulled  the 
machine  to  the  top  of  an  adjacent  hill;  when 
alone,  he  drew  the  machine  down  the  hill,  and 
through  the  standing  grain,  when  it  cut  every 
head  clean  in  its  track! 

115 


The  same  machine  was  directly  afterwards 
exhibited  before  the  Hamilton  County  Agri- 
cultural Society  near  Carthage,  on  the  2nd  of 
July,  1833.  Of  its  operation  and  success,  the 
following  statements,  and  certificates,  now  in 
our  possession,  sufficiently  testify.  Doctor 
Wallace  as  well  as  some  others  of  the  gentle- 
men, are  living  witnesses  of  what  is  here  stated. 

Cincinnati,  November  20th,  1833. 
This  may  certify  that  I  was  present  on  the 
2nd  day  of  July  near  Carthage,  in  this  county, 
at  an  experimental  trial  with  a  machine  in- 
vented by  Mr.  Obed  Hussey  for  cutting  grain. 
The  operation  was  performed  on  a  field  of 
wheat.  The  machine  was  found  to  cut  the 
Wallace  wheat  clean,  and  with  great  rapidity.  But 
owing  to  its  having  been  imperfectly  made, 
being  only  constructed  for  the  experiment, 
some  parts  of  wood  which  should  have  been 
made  of  iron,  and  in  consequence  frequently 
getting  some  parts  out  of  order,  a  correct  esti- 
mate of  the  quantity  of  work  it  would  perform 
in  a  given  time  could  not  be  made.  One  point 
was,  however,  satisfactorily  established,  that 
the  principle  upon  which  the  machine  is  con- 
structed will  operate ;  and  when  well  built  will 
be  an  important  improvement,  and  greatly 
facilitate  the  harvesting  of  grain.  I  would  also 
remark  that  the  horses  moving  the  machine 

116 


were  walked,  and  trotted,  and  it  was  found  to 
cut  best  with  the  greatest  velocity. 

C.  D.  WALLACE, 
Secretary  of  the  Hamilton  County 
Agricultural  Society. 

We,  the  undersigned,  witnessed  the  exhibi- 
bition  of  Mr.  O.  Hussey's  Machine  for  cutting 
grain  alluded  to  by  Dr.  Wallace,  and  do  fully 
concur  with  his  statement  of  its  performance. 

We  would  further  add,  that  notwithstanding 

,  .        Exceeded 

its  temporary  construction,  its  performance  far 

exceeded  our  expectations.  Cutting  the  grain 
clean  and  rapidly,  and  leaving  it  in  good  order 
for  binding.  We  are  of  the  opinion  that  the 
machine  is  capable  of  being  propelled  at  the 
rate  of  five  miles  the  hour,  and  do  good  work. 
The  machine  was  worked  when  the  cutters 
were  both  in  a  sharp  and  a  dull  condition,  and 
no  difference  could  be  perceived  in  its  execu- 
tion. 

(Signed)    "G.  A.  MAYHEW, 

"T.  R.  SEEKING, 

"A.  CASTNER, 

"JACOB  WHITE, 

"H.  B.  COFFIN, 

"C.  F.  COFFIN, 

"S.  W.  FOLGER, 

"T.  B.  COFFIN, 

"WM.    PADDOCK." 


117 


There  are  several  other  certificates  equally 
conclusive  and  satisfactory;  but  we  will  only 
copy  in  addition  to  the  foregoing,  a  short  piece 
from  the  Farmer  and  Mechanic,  issued  July 
3d,  1833,  in  Cincinnati,  as  follows: 

"Several  members  of  the  Agricultural  So- 
ciety on  last  Wednesday  attended  in  Carthage 
to  see  a  machine  for  cutting  wheat  by  horse 
power,  in  operation.  It  was  propelled  by  two 
horses,  and  cut  as  fast  as  eight  persons  could 
conveniently  bind,  doing  the  cutting  neatly. 

"This  machine  is  the  invention  of  Mr.  O. 
Hussey,  and  will  no  doubt  prove  a  useful  addi- 
tion to  our  agricultural  implements.  Mr.  J.  C. 
Ludlow  suggested  that  it  would  be  good  econ- 
omy of  time  and  labor  to  take  a  threshing  ma- 
chine into  the  field  and  thresh  out  the  grain  as 
it  is  reaped,  thereby  saving  the  binding  and 
hauling  to  the  barn  or  stack.  We  think  the 
suggestion  a  good  one." 

The         Here,  then,  was  the  problem  solved — the 
Problem  great  discovery  made  that  had  puzzled  the 
Solved  brains  of  hundreds  if  not  of  thousands,  and  for 
centuries.     No  one  we  fearlessly  assert  had 
ever  succeeded  so  completely  and  satisfactor- 
ily, and  with  so  simple  and  practical  a  machine. 

Some  visited  the  exhibition  determined  to 
condemn  as  they  afterwards  acknowledged, 
deeming  the  thing  impracticable;  but  all  were 
convinced;  for  the  demonstration  was  of  that 

118 


character  which  left  no  room  for  doubt  or  cavil 
in  the  minds  of  any. 

It  was  indeed  a  triumph, — not  perhaps  en-  A  Great 
tirely  unexpected  to  the  inventor — but  neither  Triumph 
he,  nor  any  one  else  at  that  early  day,  could 
foresee  the  wonderful  changes  ultimately  to 
be  effected,  and  the  world-wide  renown  to  be 
conferred  on  the  inventor  as  the  result  of  this 
experiment ;  one  that  was  certain  to  immortal- 
ize his  name  as  a  pioneer  and  benefactor  in  the 
most  useful  and  peaceful  pursuits  in  life.  It 
was  too,  the  dawn  of  a  brighter  day  to  the  toil- 
ing husbandman,  by  lightening  his  labors,  and 
adding  to  his  comfort  and  independence;  only 
circumscribed  in  its  beneficial  influence  by  the 
bounds  of  civilization. 

Some  may  possibly  suppose  that  we  view 
the  invention  in  too  glowing  colors;  but  we 
have  yet  to  meet  with  the  farmer  who  owned 
a  good  reaping  and  mowing  machine  that 
would  dispense  with  its  advantages  for  twice 
the  cost  of  the  implement,  and  again  be  com- 
pelled to  resort  to  the  sickle,  the  cradle,  and 
the  scythe;  for  of  a  truth  it  completely  super- 
sedes all  three  in  competent  hands  and  with 
fair  usage,  in  both  the  grain  and  grass  crops. 

It  is  difficult  to  confine  our  narrative  to  its 
intended  brief  limits  and  select  from  the  mass 
of  evidence  on  hand  as  to  the  uninterrupted 
success  of  Hussey's  invaluable  invention  from 

119 


that  day  to  the  present — now  twenty-one 
years.  We  will  therefore  only  select  a  single 
and  short  account  of  each  year;  until  about 
1840  or  '42;  not  long  after  which  a  few  other 
inventors  came  before  the  public.  There  was, 
No  however,  no  competitor  in  the  field  from  1833 
Competitors  to  1841  or  1842)  either  in  Europe  or  America, 
so  far  as  we  can  ascertain,  that  did  more  than 
make  a  few  occasional  trials;  none  attracted 
public  attention,  or  were  successful  and  effi- 
cient machines  even  in  the  estimation  of  the 
projectors  themselves.  The  evidence  proves 
it,  and  it  is  corroborated  by  our  own  personal 
knowledge,  having  been  constantly  engaged  in 
Agricultural  and  Mechanical  pursuits  for  more 
than  thirty  years — and,  as  we  believe,  familiar 
with  most  of  the  important  improvements  of 
the  age ;— of  all  in  fact,  directly  connected  with 
agriculture  in  its  labor  saving  implements,  of 
any  notoriety. 

Many  alleged  improvements  have  been 
made  in  the  Reaper  in  the  past  ten  or  twelve 
years;  and  many  more  still  within  half  that 
period.  How  far  they  are  new  inventions,  and 
actual  improvements,  we  can  better  judge  by 
examining  Hussey's  patent;  for  it  describes 
the  cutting  apparatus  clearly  and  minutely, 
and  which  in  fact  is  the  whole  thing, — the 
"one  thing  needful"  to  success.  For  the  use 
of  wheels,  or  a  system  of  gearing  to  all  kinds 
120 


of  motive  machinery  is  coeval  with  the  first  No  Reaping 
dawn  of  mechanical  science.    How  ancient  we  Mf chmc 
know  not,  for  the  Prophets  of  old  spoke  of  Husse 
"wheels  within  wheels"  near  three  thousand  Principles 
years  ago;  and  it  is  very  certain  the  hand  of 
man,  unaided  by  wheels  and  machinery,  never 
erected  the  vast  Pyramids  and  other  struc- 
tures of  antiquity.    We  do  not  believe  there  is 
a  single  Reaping  and  Mowing  machine  in  suc- 
cessful operation  on  this  continent  that  is  not 
mainly  indebted  to  Hussey's  invention  in  the 
cutting    apparatus,    for    its    success:    deprive 
them  of  this  essential  feature — disrobe  them 
of  their  borrowed  plumes,  and  their  success 
would  be  like  the  flight  of  the  eagle,  suddenly 
bereft  of  his  pinions, — he  must  fall;  and  the 
machines  would  stand  still,  for  not  a  farmer  in 
the  land  would  use  them. 

As  previously  remarked,  O.  Hussey's  first 
patent  is  dated  in  1833.  We  omit  the  more 
general  description  of  the  machine,  and  copy 
only  what  embraces  the  most  important  fea- 
tures, the  guards  and  knives;  also  an  extract 
from  his  improvement  patented  in  1847,  to 
obviate  choking  in  the  guards: 

"On  the  front  edge  of  the  platform  is  fixed 
the  cutting  or  reaping  apparatus,  which  is  con- 
structed in  the  following  manner:  A  series  of 
iron  spikes,  and  which  I  will  call  guards,  arc 
fixed  permanently  to  the  platform,  and  extend 
121 


seven  or  eight  inches,  more  or  less,  beyond  the 
edge  of  the  platform,  parallel  to  each  other, 
horizontal,  and  pointing  forward.  These 
The  Guards  guards  are  about  three  inches  apart,  of  a  suit- 
able size,  say  three-quarters  of  an  inch  square, 
more  or  less,  at  the  base,  and  lessening  towards 
the  points.  The  guards  are  formed  of  a  top 
and  bottom  piece,  joined  at  the  point  and  near 
the  back,  being  nearly  parallel,  and  about  one- 
eighth  of  an  inch  apart,  forming  a  horizontal 
mortice  or  slit  through  the  guard;  these  mor- 
tices being  on  a  line  with  each  other,  form  a 
continued  range  of  openings  or  slits  through 
the  guards.  The  first  guard  is  placed  on  the 
rear  of  the  right  wheel,  and  the  last  at  the  ex- 
treme end  of  the  platform,  and  the  intermedi- 
ate guards  at  equal  distances  from  each  other, 
and  three  inches  apart,  more  or  less,  from  cen- 
ter to  center. 

"The  cutter  or  saw  (f)  is  formed  of  thin 
triangular  plates  of  steel  fastened  to  a  straight 
fiat  rod,  (g)  of  steel,  iron  or  wood,  one  inch 
The  Cotter  and  a  half  wide ;  these  steel  plates  are  arranged 
side  by  side,  forming  a  kind  of  saw  with  teeth 
three  inches  at  the  base,  and  four  and  a  half 
inches  long,  more  or  less,  sharp  on  both  sides, 
and  terminating  nearly  in  a  point.  The  saw 
is  then  passed  through  all  the  guards  in  the 
aforesaid  range  of  mortices,  the  size  of  the 
mortice  being  suited  to  receive  the  saw  with 

122 


Diagram    Showing    Arrangement    of    Guards    and    Knives 


the  teeth  pointing  forward;  observing  always 
that  the  points  of  the  saw  teeth  should  corre- 
spond with  the  center  of  the  guards.  One  end 
of  the  saw  is  connected  with  a  pitman  moved 
by  a  crank,  and  receiving  its  motion  from  the 
main  axis,  by  one  or  two  sets  of  cog  wheels. 
The  vibration  of  this  crank  must  be  equal  to 
the  distances  of  the  centers  of  the  guards,  or 
the  points  of  the  saw  teeth,  or  thereabouts,  so 
when  the  machine  is  in  motion,  the  point  of 
each  saw  tooth  may  pass  from  center  to  center 
of  the  guards  on  each  side  of  the  same  tooth  at 
every  vibration  of  the  crank ;  if  the  main  wheels 
are  three  feet  four  inches  in  diameter,  they 
should  in  one  revolution  give  the  crank  sixteen 
vibrations,  more  or  less;  the  saw  teeth  should 
play  clear  of  the  guards,  both  above  and 
below.  *  *  * 

"The  power  is  given  by  locking  the  wheels 
to  the  main  axis,  the  machine  has  one  square 
wheel  box,  the  other  round  and  locked  at 
pleasure.  If  the  power  should  be  wanted, 

one,   two,   or  more  horses  are  attached  and  , 

.     ,  ,  .          Operation 

driven    on   the    stubble   before    the   machine, 

the  right  wheel  running  near  the  standing 
grain,  the  platform  with  the  saw  in  its  front 
edge  extends  on  the  right,  at  right  angles  with 
the  direction  of  the  horses,  with  the  guards  and 
saw  teeth  presented  to  the  standing  grain — 
when  the  machine  moves  forward,  the  saw 

123 


moves  with  the  teeth  endwise  and  horizontal, 
the  grain  or  grass  is  brought  between  the 
guards,  the  saw  teeth  in  passing  through  the 
guards,  cut  the  stalk  while  held  both  above  and 
below  the  saw — the  butts  of  the  grain  receive 
an  impulse  forward  by  the  motion  of  the  ma- 
chine while  in  the  act  of  being  cut,  which 
causes  the  heads  of  the  grain  to  fall  directly 
backwards  on  the  platform — in  this  manner  the 
platform  receives  the  grain  until  a  sufficient 
quantity  is  collected  to  make  one  or  more  bun- 
dles, according  to  the  pleasure  of  the  operator, 
then  it  is  deposited  with  a  proper  instrument 
by  the  operator,  who  may  ride  on  the  ma- 
chine." 

Here  follows  the  dimensions  of  a  machine 
suited  to  two  horses,  which  is  only  copied  so 
far  as  refers  to  the  cutting  apparatus,  viz :  "The 
back  of  the  saw  may  be  from  one  inch  to  one 
and  one-half  inches  wide,  and  from  three-six- 
teenths to  one-quarter  of  an  inch  thick ;  and  the 
steel  plates  for  the  teeth  should  be  about  one- 
tenth  of  an  inch  thick;  one  end  of  the  mortice 
in  the  guard  should  be  fitted  to  receive  the 
back  of  the  saw,  so  that  the  bearing  may  be 
on  the  back  of  the  saw  only." 

"In  this  machine  the  following  points  are 
claimed  as  new  and  original :  1st.  The  straight 
horizontal  saw,  with  the  teeth  sharp  on  their 
two  sides  for  cutting  grain.  2d.  The  guards 

124 


forming  double  bearers  above  and  below  the  The  Fonr 
saw,  whereby  the  cutting  is  made  sure,  whether  Es8*ntial» 
with  a  sharp  or  dull  edge,  the  guards  at  the 
same  time  protecting  the  saw  from  rocks  or 
stones,  or  other  large  substances  it  may  meet 
with.  3d.  The  peculiar  construction  that  the 
saw  teeth  may  run  free,  whereby  the  necessary 
pressure  and  consequent  friction  of  two  cor- 
responding edges  cutting  together,  as  on  the 
principle  of  scissors,  is  entirely  avoided.  4th. 
The  peculiar  arrangement  by  which  the  horses 
are  made  to  go  before  the  machine,  being  more 
natural,  and  greatly  facilitating  the  use  of  the 
machine,  and  the  general  arrangement  of  the 
points  as  above  described. 

"In  cutting  grass,  the  platform  is  reduced 
in  width,  and  the  grass  falls  on  the  ground  as 
it  is  cut." 

In  the  improvement  of  the  guards  patented 
in  1847,  the  claim  states :  "I  accordingly  claim 
the  opening  above  the  blades  A,  fig.  3,  and  at 
D,  fig.  1,  in  combination  with  vibrating  blades. 
I  also  claim  the  particular  application  of  the 
flush  edge  at  the  fork  of  the  blades,  for  the 
purpose  described. 

"The  end  and  design  of  the  improvements 
above  claimed  is  to  prevent  the  blades  chok- 
ing." 

En  passant,  we  would  ask  any  intelligent 
and  candid  farmer  or  mechanic  who  has  ex- 
195 


amined  a  successful  reaper,  to  compare  the 
foregoing  plain  specifications  which  all  can  un- 
derstand, with  the  cutting  apparatus  of  the 
most  successful  modern  machine.  And  we 
would  especially  desire  him  to  compare  them 
in  principle  with  the  "improved  form  of  fingers 
to  hold  up  the  corn,  and  an  iron  case  to  pre- 
serve the  sickles  from  clogging;"  not  the  al- 
leged invention  of  1831,  by  C.  H.  McCormick, 
and  abandoned  from  1840  to  1843,  but  the 
McCormick  ciamis  patented  by  him  in  1845  [as  stated  in 

Twelve 

Tears  Late  t^ie  ^etter  to  Philip  Pusey,  M.  P.],  twelve  years 
after  the  date  of  Hussey's  patent,  and  twelve 
years  after  his  most  complete  and  uninterrupt- 
ed success  in  cutting  both  grain  and  grass.  In 
fact,  there  was  no  year  from  and  including 
1833  up  to  1854,  a  period  of  21  years  the  past 
harvest,  that  we  have  not  the  most  positive 
and  conclusive  evidence  of  the  success  of  Hus- 
sey's reaper;  in  numerous  cases  the  same  ma- 
chines had  cut  from  500  to  800,  and  even  one 
thousand  acres;  in  one  instance,  the  same  ma- 
chine was  used  for  fourteen  harvests,  or  as 
many  years,  successively  and  successfully. 

We  have  given  some  of  the  evidence  for 
1833.  For  1834  we  annex  two  letters  giving 
an  account  of  the  two  machines  made  this 
year,  one  in  Illinois,  and  the  other  in  New 
York,  viz: 

196 


"Spring  Creek,  Sangamon  Co.,  111., 

"October  1st,  1854. 
"Mr.  Obed  Hussey,  Baltimore: 

"Dear  Sir: — Your  favor  of  August  10th 
came  to  hand  a  few  days  since.  The  reason 
was,  it  lay  at  Berlin  (formerly  Island  Grove 
Post-office)  and  my  Post-office  address  is 
Springfield,  the  only  place  where  I  call  for 
letters. 

"In  answer  to  your  query,  how  your  Reap-  Canfield 
ing  Machine  worked  in  1834,  I  have  to  say  that  Testimonial 
it  cut  about  sixteen  acres  of  wheat  for  me  on 
my  farm ;  that  it  did  the  work  in  first  rate  style ; 
according  to  my  best  recollection,  as  well  as 
any  of  the  machines  that  have  since  been  in- 
troduced.   The  only  objection  I  recollect  being 
made,  was,  that  when  the  straw  was  wet,  or 
there  was  much  green  grass  among  the  wheat, 
the  blades  would  choke.    You  certainly  demon- 
strated in    1834   the  practicability  of  cutting 
grain  or  grass  with  horse-power;  and  all  the 
machines  since  introduced  seem  to  have  copied 
your  machine  in  all  its  essential  features. 
"I  am  respectfully  yours, 
"JOHN  E.  CANFIELD." 

The  next  letter  we  copy  from  the  Genesee 
Farmer  of  December  6th,  1834.  The  reader 
will  readily  perceive  that  the  author,  William 

197 


C.  Dwight,  knew  how  to  handle  the  pen  as  well 
as  the  plow,  and  equally  well  to  work  the 
reaper,  being  a  practical  farmer.  But  we  are 
pained  to  add  that  he  lost  his  life  by  the  fatal 
railroad  accident  at  Norwalk,  Ct.,  about  a  year 
since. 

From  the  Genesee  Farmer,   December  6,   1834. 

"To  the  Editor  of  the  Genesee  Farmer: 

"I  wrote  you  last  May  that  Mr.  Hussey,  the 
inventor  of  a  machine  for  harvesting  wheat, 
had  left  in  this  village  one  of  his  machines  for 
the  purpose  of  giving  our  farmers  an  oppor- 
tunity to  test  its  value,  and  I  promised  to  write 
you  further  about  it  when  it  had  been  put  to 
use.  For  many  reasons  which  will  not  interest 
either  yourself  or  the  public,  the  matter  has 
been  delayed  till  the  first  rainy  day,  after  my 
fall  work  was  out  of  the  way,  should  give 
leisure  to  remember  and  fulfill  my  promise. 

"The  machine  has  been  fully  tried,  and  I 
am  gratified  to  be  able  to  say  that  it  has  fully 
succeeded;  hundreds  of  farmers  from  the  dif- 
ferent towns  of  this  and  the  adjoining  counties 
have  witnessed  its  operations,  and  all  have  not 
only  expressed  their  confidence  in  its  success, 
but  their  gratification  in  the  perfection  of  the 
work. 

"As  every  inquirer  asks  the  same  series  of 
questions,  I  presume  your  readers  will  have  a 
128 


like  course  of  thought,  and  wish  for  satisfac- 
tion in  the  same  particulars.  To  give  them 
this,  I  will  write  them  in  their  order,  and  give 
the  answers : 

"Does  the  machine  make  clean  work? 

"It  saves  all  the  grain.  To  use  the  lan- 
guage of  a  gratified  looker-on,  an  old  and  ex- 
perienced farmer,  'it  cheats  the  hogs.'* 

"Does  the  machine  expedite  the  work? 

"What  the  machine  is  capable  of  accom- 
plishing, we  who  have  used  it  can  hardly  say, 
as  we  had  no  field  in  fit  order,  large  enough 
for  a  fair  trial  through  a  whole  day;  and  can 
only  say  what  it  has  done.  Five  acres  of  heavy 
wheat,  on  the  Genesee  flats,  were  harvested  in 
two  hours  and  a  quarter. 

"In  what  condition  is  the  wheat  left,  and 
how  is  the  work  done  where  the  wheat  is 
lodged? 

"The  machine  leaves  the  wheat  in  gavels 
large  enough  for  a  sheaf,  and  where  grain 
stands  well  enough  to  make  fair  work  with  the 
cradle,  it  leaves  the  straw  in  as  good  condition 
to  bind  as  the  gavels  of  a  good  reaper.  Whether 
the  grain  stands  or  is  lodged  is  of  little  con- 
sequence, except  as  to  the  appearance  of  the 
sheaf,  and  the  necessity  of  saving  more  straw, 
when  lodged,  than  is  desirable.  The  condition 


*  The  bogs  are  the  gleaners  in  this  section  of  country. 
129 


of  the  sheaf  when  the  grain  is  lodged  depends 
much  upon  the  adroitness  of  the  raker. 

"What  number  of  hands,  and  what  strength 
of  team  is  necessary  to  manage  the  machine 
advantageously  ? 

"Two  men,  one  to  drive  the  team  and  the 
other  to  rake  off  the  wheat,  and  two  horses, 
work  the  machine;  but  when  the  grain  is 
heavy,  or  the  land  mellow,  a  change  of  horses 
is  necessary,  as  the  gait  of  the  horses  is  too 
rapid  to  admit  of  heavy  draft.  The  horses  go 
at  the  rate  of  four  to  five  miles  an  hour,  and 
when  the  growth  of  straw  is  not  heavy  a  fair 
trot  of  the  team  is  not  too  much. 

"Is  the  machine  liable  to  derangement  and 
destruction  from  its  own  motion? 

"This  is  a  question  which  cannot  be  so 
directly  answered  as  the  others.  We  have  only 
used  the  machine  to  cut  about  fifty  acres,  and 
have  had  no  trouble;  judging  from  appear- 
ances so  far,  should  say  it  was  as  little  subject 
to  this  evil  as  any  machinery  whatever.  The 
wear  upon  the  cutting  part  being  so  little  as  to 
require  not  more  than  fifteen  minutes  sharpen- 
ing in  a  day;  there  is  no  loss  of  time  on  this 
score. 

"Is  the  sheaf  a  good  one  to  thresh? 

"The  man  who  has  fed  the  threshing  ma- 
chine with  the  grain  of  twenty  acres  cut  by 
this  machine,  says  the  sheaves  are  much  better 

130 


than  those  of  cradled  grain,  and  quite  as  good 
as  those  of  a  reaper. 

"There  is  one  more  advantage  beyond  ordi- 
nary inquiries,  of  consequence,  where  so  much 
grain  is  raised  as  in  this  valley;  be  the  grain 
ever  so  ripe,  there  is  no  waste  of  grain  by  any 
agitation  of  the  straw,  and  all  the  waste  which 
can  take  place  must  arise  from  the  handling 
and  shaking  in  binding. 

"I  am  yours,  etc., 

"WM.  C.  DWIGHT. 
"Moscow,  Livingston  Co.,  N.  Y.,  Nov.  14,  1834. 

"N.  B. — The  machine  we  used  was  intended 
only  for  upland,  but  by  some  little  alterations 
and  additions  we  used  it  with  equal  facility  on 
all  kinds  of  soil ;  and  it  can  be  used  on  any  farm 
so  clean  from  stumps  and  stones  as  not  to  en- 
danger the  blocking  the  wheels." 

The  following  letter  is  evidence  for  1835, 
and  also  refers  to  the  originality  of  the  inven- 
tion by  O.  Hussey. 

"Palmyra,  Mo.,  Aug.  14,  1854. 

"Friend  Hussey — Yours  duly  received.  As 
to  the  machines  sent  by  you  (ordered  some  two 
years  since)  they  both  worked  well. 

"Before  you  had  invented  your  machine  in 
1831  or  1832,  your  attention  was  drawn  to  a 
mode  of  cutting  grain,  hemp  and  grass  and 

131 


you  told  me  you  thought  you  could  invent  such 
a  machine  to  be  drawn  by  horses;  and  after 
you  had  returned  to  Cincinnati  from  Laurence- 
burg  you  wrote  me  a  letter  in  '32  or  at  the 
furthest  in  '33  (for  I  left  Indiana  2nd  Oct., 
1833)  with  a  draft  and  description  of  a  plan  for 
cutting  grain.  The  draft  was  thus  (here  fol- 
lows a  diagram  of  the  cutting  apparatus  exact- 
ly as  described  by  the  patent)  and  the  descrip- 
tion was,  that  these  knives  were  to  work  by 
the  motion  of  the  wheels,  being  a  perfect  de- 
scription of  the  invented  principle. 

"As  soon  as  I  saw  the  plan,  I  was  satisfied 
of  its  success  and  wrote  to  you  that  there  was 
no  doubt  of  the  success  of  your  machine ;  that 
it  was  astonishing  the  world  had  so  many 
thousand  years  been  confined  to  the  sickle 
when  so  obvious  a  mode  of  cutting  grain  and 
grass  existed;  and  shortly  after  you  obtained 
a  patent  for  the  machine. 

"On  the  6th  July,  1835,  you  brought  to  Pal- 
myra two  of  your  machines,  and  they  were  put 
in  operation  near  this  place — one  in  a  meadow 
between  here  and  Philadelphia,  and  one  in  the 
heavy  grass  in  Marion  City  bottom.*  The  ma- 
chines did  cut  well.  I  was  the  editor  of  the 
Missouri  Courier,  from  the  month  of  Novem- 
ber, 1833,  until  1838,  and  brought  your  ma- 

*  Both  of  these  machines  wer«  sold  to  Wm.  Muldrow, 
Agent,  of  Marion  College,  Marion  County,  Mo. 

139 


chine  before  the  public ;  it  excited  much  atten- 
tion, and  its  performance  was  highly  satisfac- 
tory. The  results  of  the  trials  were  published 
in  the  paper  by  me  in  August  or  September, 
1835.  I  knew  of  the  capacity  of  the  machine, 
and  that  it  did  so  execute  in  the  bottom  three 
acres  an  hour.  In  this  I  cannot  be  mistaken, 
for  I  felt  at  the  time  the  deepest  interest  in  the 
success  of  the  machine.  Mr.  McElroy  is  dead, 
where  you  boarded,  and  also  Samuel  Muldrow 
and  James  Muldrow.  Still  I  will  inquire  if  any 
persons  can  be  found  who  were  present. 

"I  know  the  results,  and  recollect  distinctly 
the  reception  the  machines  met  with,  and  the 
prices,  to  wit,  $150  each.  Muldrow  bought 
another  for  $500 — which  was  a  whirling  wheel. 
You  recollect  it;  it  never  run  any.  Yours,  I 
know  it  was  said  then,  would  cut  off  brush 
large  enough  for  a  hoop-hole.  Court  is  now  in 
session,  but  as  soon  as  I  can  ascertain  the  wit- 
nesses (at  the  exhibition)  I  will  write  you 
further.  But  my  recollection  is  distinct,  from 
the  relations  existing  between  us,  my  interest 
in  machinery  generally,  and  my  position  as 
editor  of  the  only  paper  of  this  section  of 
country. 

"As  ever,  your  friend, 

"EDWIN  G.  PRATT." 

183 


In  1836  O.  Hussey  visited  Maryland  at  the 
written  solicitation  of  the  Board  of  Trustees  of 
The  Maryland  Agricultural  Society,  for  the 
Eastern  Shore.  The  fame  of  his  reaping  ex- 
ploits in  the  State  of  New  York,  and  the  far 
West,  had  reached  the  East ;  though  with  some- 
thing like  a  "snail's  pace."  We  had  not  then 
the  Magnetic  Telegraph,  which  with  lightning 
speed  enables  the  East  to  talk  with  the  West; 
nor  even  the  "iron  horse,"  by  whose  speed  and 
power,  the  reaper  that  cut  a  large  crop  of  wheat 
in  Maryland,  could  within  the  same  week  cut 
another  equally  large  in  the  valley  of  the  Mis- 
sissippi ;  but  it  then  required  some  two  to  three 
years  to  prepare  the  public  mind  for  the  recep- 
tion of  the  machine  here;  and  owing  to  the 
Mode  of  limited  means  of  the  inventor,  the  transporta- 
Trans-  tjon  from  place  to  place  was  often  done  by  a 
single  horse ;  accompanied  by  the  inventor  foot- 
sore and  weary  from  walking  hundreds  of 
miles! 

The  annexed  certificate  was  given,  pub- 
lished, and  widely  circulated  after  a  full  trial 
of  the  machine,  in  cutting  more  than  two  hun- 
dred acres,  and  by  large  farmers  and  practical 
men,  known  throughout  the  State.  Comment 
is  unnecessary  on  such  a  paper;  but  we  feel 
bound  to  state  that  it  was  mainly  owing  to  the 
exertions  of  the  liberal  public  spirited  gentle- 
men, the  last,  though  not  the  least  of  the  sign- 

134 


ers,  Gen.  Tench  Tilghman,  that  the  Reaper 
was  then  introduced  into  this  State.  He  was 
the  early  and  steadfast  friend  of  the  Patentee, 
and  to  the  cause  of  agricultural  improvement 
in  our  State.  Strange  as  it  may  appear  to  many 
at  the  present  day,  and  notwithstanding  these 
demonstrations  in  Ohio,  Illinois,  New  York, 
Missouri  and  Maryland,  which  did  not  admit  of 
cavil  or  doubt  as  to  the  entire  efficiency  and 
success  of  Hussey's  reaper,  scarcely  a  farmer 
could  be  found  ready  and  willing  to  take  hold 
of  it,  and  aid  the  inventor  in  introducing  it 
into  use.  But  farmers  as  a  class  are  prover- 
bially cautious,  and  disinclined  to  change  from 
established  customs  and  usages;  it  often  re- 
quires "line  upon  line  and  precept  upon  pre- 
cept," aided,  too,  by  almost  a  free  gift  of  the 
article,  to  induce  them  even  to  give  a  new  agri- 
cultural implement  a  fair  trial, — a  plough,  for 
instance,  that  will  do  better  work,  with  a  fourth 
to  a  third  less  draught ;  the  old  and  nearly  worn 
out  implement  "does  well  enough."  Gen.  T. 
was,  we  believe,  the  first  farmer  in  Maryland 
to  use  and  purchase  a  reaping  machine;  and 
by  so  doing,  to  aid  the  inventive  genius  and 
talent  of  his  countrymen,  and  also  at  the  same 
time  greatly  to  benefit  the  interest  of  his 
brother  farmers.  It  avails  little  to  the  in- 
ventor, or  the  public,  how  valuable  his  improve- 
ment may  be, — for  in  nine  cases  out  of  ten  the 

135 


An  inventor  is  limited  in  means, — if  none  can  be 

Inventor's  found  who  are  both  able  and  willing  to  lend  a 
Difficulties   •    «_•        «^       *  -  •.  i*    * 

helping  hand  to  modest  merit;  for  true  genius 

is  ever  modest;  and  unfortunately  the  term  is 
too  often  synonymous  with  penury  and  want- 
Very  few  of  the  really  valuable  inventions 
inure  to  the  benefit  of  the  inventors, — even  to 
a   tithe   of   the   profits  that   are   occasionally 
realized.    His  necessities  often  compel  him  to 
a  forced  sale  of  his  patent  right  to  some  capi- 
The  talist  who  has  the  tact  to  turn  other  men's  wits 
Inventor's  to  his  own  advantage;  or  the  Public, — which 
Rewards  simply  means  other  capitalists  of  another  de- 
scription, who  possess  little  or  no  inventive 
genius  themselves,   and  just  about  as  much 
principle  as  genius — seize  upon  the  invention, 
and  often  in  spite  of  law,  justice,  or  right,  reap 
the  reward  justly  due  to  another. 

This,  however,  is  a  digression  for  which  we 
beg  the  reader's  pardon;  but  we  could  not  let 
the  occasion  pass  without  rendering  this  hon- 
est tribute  to  the  public  spirited  farmer,  who 
had  the  discernment  to  perceive  its  merits,  and 
the  liberality  to  aid  its  introduction,  of  one  of 
the  most  valuable  improvements  of  this,  or  any 
age. 

The  following  three  letters  not  only  em- 
brace the  year  1837,  but  are  equally  good  evi- 
dence from  that  period  to  the  present,  1854. 
As  they  are  short,  and  to  the  point,  we  use 

136 


them  all.  The  very  appropriate  and  just  re- 
marks of  CoL  Hughes  as  regards  the  rights, 
and  what  is  due  to  inventive  talent,  we  most 
cordially  respond  to;  as  must  every  right 
minded  and  disinterested  reader.  He  refers 
to  CoL  Edw.  Lloyd  of  "Wye  House"  as  the 
largest  wheat  giowei  in  Maryland;  we  much 
doubt  if  he  is  not  die  largest  in  the  Union. 
Several  years  since,  he  informed  us  that  his 
average  crop  of  wheat  was  from  33  to  35  thou- 
sand bushels;  and  a  year  or  two  ago  we  learned 
that  the  crop  exceeded  forty  thousand  bushels. 
He  now,  and  for  many  years  past  has  used 
Hussey's  Reaper  exclusively.  More  satisfac- 
tory and  conclusive  evidence  cannot  be  given, 
or  desired,  than  is  afforded  in  these  three  let- 
ters, of  the  early  use,  and  long  proved  efficiency 
of  the  invention, 


"Hornewood,  E.  Shore, 

"August  22,  f54. 

"Dear  Sir:  —  In  reply  to  your  enquiry 
whether  I  recollect  the  time,  and  the  success 
of  your  reaping  machine  at  my  father's  in  1837, 
I  answer  that  I  do  perfectly;  and  also  seeing 
it  in  operation  in  company  with  my  friend,  Mr. 
J.  H.  Luckett,  of  Balto.,  at  CoL  H.  L.  Edmond- 
son's  of  Talbot  Co.  the  same  season. 

"My  father  expressed  himself  highly  satis- 
fied with  the  performance  of  the  reaper,  as  did 

1ST 


other  gentlemen  who  saw  it  in  operation  at 
Cheston.  So  well  convinced  was  my  father  of 
the  value  of  the  machine,  that  he  offered  you  a 
considerable  advance  per  acre  on  your  charge 
for  cutting,  to  remain  and  reap  his  two  fields, 
say  125  to  130  acres,  which  you  declined,  owing 
to  prior  engagements.  At  an  early  date  after 
this  trial,  my  father  secured  one  of  your  reap- 
ers, and  the  farm  has  since  never  been  without. 

"My  brother,  Dr.  DeCourcy,  has  now  one 
which  did  its  work  most  excellently  well  this 
past  harvest,  and  without  any  stoppage.  With 
some  trivial  repairs,  it  has  been  in  successful 
use  nearly  ten  years. 

"Wishing  you  every  possible  success  with 
your  reaper,  for  which  the  agricultural  com- 
munity owe  you  a  heavy  debt, 

"I  am  respectfully  yours, 
"N.  H.  ROZIER  DE  COURCEY." 

"Baltimore,  October  17th,  1854. 
"To  Obed  Hussey,  Esq.: 

"Sir — In  the  harvest  of  1837  I  saw  one  of 
your  Reapers  in  operation  in  my  neighborhood 
[West  River,  Anne  Arundel  Co.,  Md.]  in 
charge  of  the  Hon.  John  C.  Weems,  who  I 
believe  was  the  owner  of  it;  and  was  so  much 
pleased  with  its  performance  that  I  ordered 
one  from  you  in  the  following  year,  1838,  which 

138 


you  set  in  motion  for  me.  It  worked  most 
admirably,  and  fully  met  my  expectations;  as 
it  has  done  from  that  early  period  to  the 
present  day. 

"In  a  loose  way,  I  estimated  that  in  the 
saving  of  labor,  and  grain  from  shattering,  it 
nearly  or  quite  paid  for  itself  the  first  harvest. 
Since  then  the  machine  has  been  much  im- 
proved. 

"Up  to  the  time  I  purchased,  very  few  had 
been  used  in  this  State.  The  first,  as  I  have 
always  understood,  was  bought  by  that  intelli- 
gent and  enterprising  farmer,  Gen.  Tench 
Tilghman,  of  Oxford,  Talbot  County.  In  1838, 
Col.  Edward  Lloyd,  of  'Wye,'  Talbot  Co.,  the 
largest  wheat  grower  in  Maryland,  and  myself, 
as  above  mentioned,  availed  ourselves  of  your 
invention;  but  I  did  not  hear  of  any  other 
orders  for  it  in  this  State.  It  came,  like  most 
other  agricultural  implements,  slowly  into  use ; 
and  I  fear  has  not  fairly  compensated  you  for 
the  labor  and  ingenuity  bestowed  upon  it. 
This,  however,  is  too  often  the  fate  of  discov- 
erers and  inventors ;  and  others  reap  the  fruits 
of  their  toil  and  genius.  I  have  long  thought 
that  governments  were  unjust  to  inventors; 
and  could  never  understand  why  a  man  has 
not  the  same  right  of  property  to  a  machine 
conceived  in  his  head,  and  constructed  by  his 

139 


hands,  as  to  that  acquired  in  any  other  manner. 
The  same  that  a  farmer  has  to  the  lands  he 
owns. 

"Very  respectfully,  y'r  ob't  serv't, 

"GEO.  W.  HUGHES." 

"Oxford,  Md.,  Sept.  22d,  1854. 
"Mr.  Obed  Hussey: 

"Dear  Sir: — I  recently  received  from  the 
Commissioner  of  Patents  the  Report  on  Me- 
chanics for  1853,  and  have  examined  with  much 
interest  the  descriptions  of  what  claim  to  be 
improvements  in  the  Reaping  Machine. 

"I  was  rather  surprised  to  find  that  so  many 
of  then  were  almost  identical  with  the  notions 
which  were  tried  and  rejected  during  the  sea- 
son you  spent  with  me  nearly  twenty  years 
ago ;  when  for  the  first  time  (I  believe)  a  reaper 
was  used  throughout  our  entire  harvest,  on  a 
farm  as  large  as  six  hundred  acres. 

"You  had  just  then  arrived  from  Cincin- 
nati with  two  machines — one  a  reaper,  and  the 
other  a  reaper  and  mower. 

"They  were  exhibited  publicly  at  Oxford 
and  Easton,  and  their  operation  on  wheat  gave 
entire  satisfaction.  The  work  throughout  the 
harvest  was  equally  well  done;  the  only  ob- 
jection being  the  delay  caused  by  repairing 
the  machinery,  a  difficulty  common  to  all  new 
machines  of  much  power  at  that  period. 

140 


"Since  then  I  have  used  one  or  more  reapers 
every  year,  and  have  watched  with  much  inter- 
est the  progress  of  their  improvement.  I  have 
examined  most  of  those  which  have  the  best 
reputation,  and  do  not  believe  there  is  a  single 
one  in  which  the  cutting  principle  has  not  been 
copied  from  yours. 

"In  attempting  to  avoid  an  infringement  of 
your  patent,  variations  have  beeen  made  either 
in  the  cutting  apparatus,  or  the  driving  machin- 
ery, by  which  they  have  been  made  more  com- 
plicated and  less  efficient.  Burrall's,  which  ap- 
proaches nearest  to  yours  in  simplicity  and 
efficiency,  is  so  close  a  copy  that  I  do  not  see 
how  the  courts  could  refuse  an  injunction  to 
prohibit  the  use  of  it.  The  only  material  dif- 
ference is  the  attempt  at  a  side  delivery  which 
was  tried  by  you  on  your  first  machine,  and 
proved  an  entire  failure. 

"Believing  sincerely  that  the  farmers  of  the  The 
U.  S.  owe  you  a  debt  of  gratitude,  which  a  re-  Farmers' 

gard  for  themselves  should  prompt  them  to  _.e  _° 

Mr.  Hussey 

pay,  and  understanding  that  attempts  have 
been  made  to  question  even  the  priority  of 
your  invention,  I  send  you  a  volume  of  the 
Genesee  Farmer  published  in  1834,  which  will 
show  the  opinion  entertained  at  that  time  by 
the  farmers  of  that  celebrated  wheat  growing 

141 


region,  both  as  to  the  efficiency  and  priority  of 

your  reaper. 

"Your  ob  t  serv't, 

"TENCH  TILGHMAN." 

As  we  have  already  much  exceeded  the  in- 
tended limits  of  the  narrative,  we  might,  per- 
haps, with  propriety,  here  rest  the  enquiry, 
having,  as  we  think,  satisfactorily  shown,  and 
by  evidence  that  cannot  be  disproved:  first, 
that  for  a. period  of  nine  or  ten  years  after  the 
Conclusive  alleged  invention  of  the  reaper  by  C.  H.  Mc- 
Evidence  Cormick  in  1831  he  did  not  sell  a  single  ma- 
chine; nor  could  he  establish  by  all  the  evi- 
dence adduced  before  the  Board  of  Extensions, 
in  1848,  that  prior  to  1840  or  1841  was  his 
reaper  in  any  degree  an  effective  or  practical 
machine;  for  as  he  himself  states  in  the  letter 
to  Philip  Pusey,  Esq.,  M.  P.,  it  was  not  until 
very  material  alterations — all  essential  it  may 
be  said — were  made,  some  six  or  eight  years 
after  the  date  of  the  patent,  could  the  machine 
be  made  to  work  even  tolerably  well.  Indeed, 
he  states,  "I  may  say  they  were  not  of  much 
practical  value,  until  the  improvements  of  my 
second  patent  in  1845,"  being  eleven  years  after 
the  date  of  the  patent,  and  fourteen  years  after 
the  alleged  invention  in  1831. 

On  the  other  hand  we  have  shown  by  as 
good  and  respectable  testimony  as  can  be  had 

142 


in  any  cause,  that  from  1833  to  1854,  a  period 
of  twenty-one  years,  Hussey's  invention  was 
most  efficient  and  satisfactory,  every  year;  not 
by  cutting  a  patch  of  the  fraction  of  an  acre, 
but  by  reaping  hundreds,  nay  thousands  of 
acres  annually,  by  the  few  machines  placed  in 
the  hands  of  the  farmers  from  1833  to  1840. 

As,  however,  we  have  given  no  direct  evi- 
dence from  Delaware,  or  Virginia,  none  from 
North  Carolina,  and  but  one  from  New  York, 
we  annex  a  few  short  testimonials  from  each, 
that  embrace  the  period  from  1838  to  1845 ;  and 
with  a  few  more  of  the  same  respectable  char- 
acter up  to  1853,  both  in  this  country  and  in 
England,  we  will  leave  the  decision  of  the  ques- 
tion to  the  intelligent  reader.  We  will,  how- 
ever, call  the  reader's  attention  to  the  conclud- 
ing paragraph  of  Maj.  J.  Jones'  letter,  from 
Delaware — one  of  the  smallest  States,  but  con- 
taining as  large  a  proportion  of  noble  minded, 
talented  men,  and  as  good  practical  farmers,  as 
any  in  the  Union.* 

It  will  be  perceived  that  a  reaper  sold  in 
1838  to  the  St.  George's  and  Appoquinomick 


*  It  is  reported  of  one  of  her  sons,  that  during  the  struggle 
for  Independence,  when  a  Delegate  to  the  Convention  from  one 
of  the  largest  and  most  powerful  Colonies  was  ready  to  quail 
and  almost  despair  of  success  in  the  unequal  contest,  he  was 
encouraged  and  cheered  on  by  a  member  from  little  Delaware; 
and  told  that  when  he  found  his  Colony  likely  to  be  overrun 
by  the  enemy,  to  call  on  Delaware  for  aid — she  would  lend  * 
helping  hand. 

143 


Agricultural  Society  had,  after  subsequently 
coming  into  the  possession  of  Col.  Vandergrift, 
and  prior  to  1845,  "cut  about  seven  hundred 
acres  of  his  grain,"  and  "was  then  in  good  re- 
pair"! We  wish  it  was  in  our  power  to  state 
how  many  times  seven  hundred  acres  this  sin- 
gle machine  had  reaped  since  1838. 

"Wheatland,  Del.,  July  21,  1845. 
"Mr.  Hussey: 

"Dear  Sir : — I  have  just  finished  cutting  my 

oats;  I  finished  cutting  my  wheat  on  the  28th 

of  June,  having  cut  over  160  acres,  excepting 

what  was  cut  by  a  cradle  in  opening  tracks  for 

An  the  horses  and  rounding  the  corners  so  that  the 

Important  machine  might  sweep  round  without  loss  of 

Testimonial    ^.         .  .  ,  .  .    ..    ,.  ,       ...  , 

.  time  in  turning,  which  it  did  with  ease  and  cer- 
Delaware  tainty,  cutting  more  than  twenty  acres  a  day 
on  an  average.  A  part  of  the  wheat  was  so 
heavy  as  to  require  three  active  shockers  to 
keep  up  with  the  cutting;  the  whole  cost  of 
all  necessary  repairs  31%  cents  for  the  harvest. 

"Of  the  two  machines  which  I  purchased  of 
you  I  used  the  large  one,  having  sold  the  small 
one  to  Richard  Millwood,  who  rents  the  farm 
of  Dr.  Noble.  Strange  as  it  may  appear,  I 
could  find  no  landholder  in  the  vicinity  who 

144 


had  enterprise  enough  to  risk  the  purchase  of 
that  machine  until  they  could  see  it  work ;  but 
after  the  performance  was  once  witnessed,  the 
impression  it  made  was  such  as  to  justify  me 
in  ordering  you  to  have  ten  ready  by  next  harv- 
est for  New  Castle  County,  Del.  Mr.  Mill- 
wood's wheat  was  very  heavy,  one  measured 
acre  having  sixty  dozen  sheaves  upon  it,  and 
the  whole  cutting  time  on  the  forty  acre  field 
was  but  two  days,  making  for  the  small  ma- 
chine a  full  average  of  twenty  acres  per  day, 
without  any  repairing  or  accident.  None  of 
the  hands  who  worked  it  had  ever  seen  such  a 
machine  before  those  you  sent  to  me.  My  crop 
has  not  all  passed  through  the  half  bushel  yet, 
but  it  will  fall  but  little  short  of  3,000  bushels 
—  expect  it  will  all  be  in  market  to-morrow. 

"In  conversation  with  Col.  Vandergrift,  the 
present  owner  of  the  Reaper  you  sold  to  the 
St.  George  and  Appoquinomick  Agricultural 
Society,  in  1838,  he  told  me  that  he  had  cut 
about  700  acres  of  wheat  and  oats  with  it  since 
he  owned  it,  and  up  to  that  time  the  cost  of 
repairs  had  been  $1.25  for  every  hundred  acres 
cut.  It  was  then  in  good  repair. 
"Yours, 

"JOHN  JONES." 

145 


"Jefferson  County,  Va., 

"August  9th,  1845. 
"To  Mr.  Obed  Hussey: 

"Dear  Sir: — We,  the  undersigned,  having 
used  your  reaping  machine  during  the  recent 
harvest  in  cutting  our  respective  crops,  take 
great  pleasure  in  tendering  to  you  this  volun- 
tary testimonial  of  the  very  high  estimation  in 
which  we  hold  your  invention.  We  have  now 
tried  your  machines  fully  and  fairly,  and  we 
are  unanimous  in  the  conclusion  that  in  every 
case  they  have  borne  the  test  in  a  manner 
which  has  excited  our  highest  admiration  of 
their  merits.  We  were  particularly  pleased 
with  their  work  in  lodged  grain;  they  cut  and 
gather  every  straw  with  the  utmost  ease,  and 
the  only  fault  at  all  that  we  have  had  to  find 
with  them  was  that  they  did  not  cut  wet  grain 
with  facility;  this  single  defect,  however,  we 
are  pleased  to  perceive  you  have  completely 
remedied  with  the  late  improvement  (with 
open  guards  to  the  knives,  etc.)  which  the 
most  of  us  saw  at  work  in  Mr.  Wm.  Butler's 
field  cut  wet  grain  and  green  oats  as  well  as 
could  possibly  be  desired — it  will  also  cut  tim- 
othy and  clover — so  that  now  we  have  no  hes- 
itation in  recommending  your  reaper,  as  we 
hereby  most  cordially  do,  to  our  brother  farm- 
ers, as  the  most  complete  and  efficient  in  agri- 
no 


cultural  operations,  and  as  one  which,  whilst 
from  its  simple  and  substantial  construction, 
is  not  liable  to  be  broken  or  to  get  out  of  order, 
will  at  the  same  time  save  its  owner  the  first 
year  more  than  its  original  cost. 

"WM.  BUTLER, 
"J.  H.  TAYLOR, 
"W.  SHORTT, 
"JOSEPH  M'MURRAN, 
"DANIEL  G.  HENKLE, 
"DAVID  L.  HENSELL, 
"W.  G.  BUTLER, 
"JAS.  S.  MARKELL, 
"V.  M.  BUTLER, 
"ANDREW  M'INTIRE, 
"ADAM  SMELL, 
"GEORGE  TABB, 
"JOHN  MARSHALL." 

"Washington  County,  Aug.  7th,  1845. 
"I  hereby  certify  that  I  have  used  Mr.  Obed 
Hussey's  wheat  cutter  through  the  late  harvest, 
and  that  it  answered  my  fullest  expectations, 
in  every  respect,  except  that  it  will  not  cut 
when  the  wheat  is  damp  from  rain  or  the  dews 
of  the  morning.  I  cut  140  acres  of  wheat  with 
it  in  nine  days;  and  on  one  occasion,  cut  off 
thirty  acres  in  eighteen  hours,  from  daylight 
in  the  morning  until  11  o'clock  the  next  day, 
and  with  the  same  four  horses,  never  having 
changed  them  during  that  time. 

"JOHN  R.  BALL. 

147 


"Oaklands  (near  Geneva),  N.  Y. 

"26th  August,  1845. 

"Mr.  Obed  Hussey,  Baltimore: 

"Dear  Sir: — Having  housed  all  the  grain 
crops  of  this  farm,  it  is  due  to  you  that  I  should 
now  frankly  admit  the  removal  of  all  my 
doubts  in  regard  to  the  effectiveness  and  ex- 
cellence of  your  'Reaping  Machine.'  The 
doubts  expressed  in  my  early  correspondence 
with  you  arose  from  the  many  abortive  at- 
tempts in  this  country  and  in  England  to  pro- 
duce a  reaping  machine,  possessing  power  and 
simplicity  and  durability;  most  of  them  were 
complicated,  and  proved  too  fragile. 

"Soon  after  the  arrival  of  your  machine,  I 
tried  its  power  and  became  readily  familiar 
with  the  manner  of  using  it;  the  result  of  my 
experience  will  appear  from  the  following 
facts : 

"The  wheat  crop  of  this  farm  covered  104 
acres,  producing  2,540  shocks,  30,480  sheaves, 
as  counted  on  the  ground,  and  again  when 
housed  in  the  grain  barn  and  sheds. 

"The  whole  crop  was  cut  by  your  reaping 
machine  in  eight  days,  using  one  team,  a  boy  to 
drive  and  a  man  to  manage  the  machine. 

"The  average  quantity  cut  per  day  was 
thirteen  acres. 

148 


V    £ 


"The  largest  quantity  cut  on  any  one  day 
was  seventeen  acres. 

"The  longest  period  for  working  the  ma- 
chine on  any  one  day  was  nine  hours. 

"Seven  men  were  stationed  on  the  field  to 
bind  the  sheaves. 

"The  cost  of  cutting  the  wheat  with  your 
machine  is  twenty-five  cents  per  acre. 

"The  total  cost  for  cutting,  raking,  binding 
and  shocking  is  seventy-eight  cents  and  a 
fraction  per  acre. 

"The  cost  may  be  stated  as  follows,  viz : 

A  man  and  team  for  eight  days  at  $1.50 

per  day  $12 . 00 

A  boy  to  drive  for  eight  days  at  fifty 

cents  per  day 4 . 00 

Interest  on  cost  of  machine  and  for 

wear  and  tear,  say  at  10  per  cent. .  10.00 

$26.00 

"Which  is  equal  to  25  cents  per  acre  on  104 
acres.  The  seven  men  employed  to  rake  and 
bind  received,  each,  $1  per  day  for  eight  days, 
say  $56,  which  sum  added  to  the  cost  for  cut- 
ting or  reaping,  gives  a  total  cost  of  $82,  or 
78  88/100  cents  per  acre. 

"I  have  compared  this  cost  with  the  cost 
paid  by  my  neighboring  farmers  this  season, 
and  find  it  vastly  in  favor  of  your  machine. 
149 


The  individual  in  this  town  who  harvested 
with  the  most  economy  paid  $1  13/100  per 
acre— other  farmers  have  paid  from  $1  25/100 
to  $2  per  acre. 

"Since  the  wheat  harvest  the  machine  has 
cut  with  signal  advantage  about  twenty  acres 
of  oats. 

"The  wheat  and  oats  were  cut  with  such 
neatness  and  precision  that  the  gleanings  were 
not  sufficient  to  pay  the  labor  of  raking. 

"The  machine  remains  in  perfect  order,  and 
did  not  fail  to  perform  all  you  promised. 

"I  deem  it  one  of  the  best  labor-saving  ma- 
chines ever  offered  for  the  advantage  of  the 
farmer;  its  effectiveness,  simple  and  durable 
construction,  have  been  witnessed  with  satis- 
faction by  a  large  number  of  my  neighbor 
farmers. 

"Respectfully  yours, 

"J.  DELAFIELD." 

The  machine  alluded  to  in  the  above  letter 
is  the  low  priced  one  at  $100. 

For  1846,  1847  and  1848  we  copy  from  the 
Richmond  Planter  and  American  Farmer — 
and  all  from  North  Carolina,  though  the  evi- 
dence from  other  sections  is  much  more  ex- 
tended, and  equally  as  conclusive : 

150 


"Somerset  Place,  Washington  Co., 
"North  Carolina  25th  Aug.  1847. 

"To  the  Editor  of  the  American  Farmer: 

"Dear  Sir : — Yours  of  the  6th  ult.  arrived  at 
my  residence  during  my  absence  in  conse- 
quence of  which  I  was  unable  to  return  you  an 
answer  in  time  for  your  August  number  of  the 
American  Farmer.  I  trust,  however,  the  delay 
will  not  materially  affect  the  value  of  my  com- 
munication. In  consequence  of  the  recom- 
mendation of  a  gentleman  who  had  used  "Hus- 
sey's  Reaper"  in  the  harvest  of  1846  with  much 
satisfaction,  I  was  induced  to  make  a  trial  of 
one  the  present  season.  It  was  put  in  operation 
under  the  direction  and  supervision  of  Mr. 
Hussey  himself,  upon  a  field  of  reclaimed  low 
ground,  originally  Cypress  Swamp,  which  of 
course  could  only  be  cultivated  in  beds — these 
beds  were  six  feet  wide,  including  the  water- 
furrow  between,  and  were  intersected  at  inter- 
vals of  about  fifty  yards  by  drains,  known  to 
us  as  tap-ditches,  which  cross  the  water  fur- 
rows at  right  angles,  and  are  cut  from  two  to 
four  inches  deeper  than  the  furrows  them- 
selves. I  am  particular  in  describing  the  land, 
as  I  had  always  supposed  that  an  insuperable 
obstacle  in  the  way  of  the  regular  action  of  any 
machine  would  be  found  in  the  irregularity  of 
surface  into  which  our  land  is  necessarily 

151 


thrown  by  our  system  of  culture.  The  machine 
surmounted  every  anticipated  difficulty,  and 
was  eminently  successful,  both  in  cutting 
lengthwise  with  the  beds  and  across  them. 
The  wheat  was  cut  in  a  most  thorough  man- 
ner; nothing  escaped  the  cutting  surfaces,  nor 
did  weeds  or  any  other  obstruction  of  the  kind 
hinder  the  machine  from  doing  its  work  per- 
fectly. During  the  running  of  the  machine  one 
day  in  the  harvest,  seventeen  acres  of  wheat 
were  cut  by  it.*  This  was  done  by  using  re- 
lays of  horses,  four  at  each  time,  the  same 
hands  being  employed,  however,  and  the  work- 
ing time  was  twelve  hours.  After  a  heavy  rain 
we  were  obliged  to  abandon  the  use  of  the  ma- 
chine, owing  to  the  fact  that  the  ground  be- 
came so  soft  that  the  "road  wheel"  as  it  is 
termed,  buried  in  the  soil,  and  would  become 
clogged  with  mud.  This  difficulty  can,  I  have 
no  doubt,  be  easily  overcome  by  increasing  the 
"tread"  of  this  wheel,  and  making  some  slight 
alteration  in  the  cog-wheel  which  gears  into  it. 
"Some  two  years  since  I  saw  an  experiment 
made  upon  an  adjoining  estate  with  McCor- 
mick's  machine;  it  cut  occasionally  well  where 
the  wheat  was  free  from  weeds,  but  any  ob- 


*When  Mr.  Hussey  was  with  me  I  informed  him  that  the 
piece  of  wheat  cut  by  the  machine  on  this  occasion  equalled 
twenty  acres,  but  I  have  since  discovered  that  I  had  been  mis- 
taken in  my  calculation  of  the  acre. 

152 


struction  from  that  source  would  immediately 

choke  it,  when  of  course  the  wheat  would  be 

overrun  without  being  cut.     The  experiment 

proved  a  failure,   and  the  machine  was  laid  A 

aside.     The  blade  in  this  machine  appears  to  McCormick 

V     "1 

me  to  be  too  delicate  in  its  cutting  surface  to 
succeed,  except  under  the  most  favorable  cir- 
cumstances. Quite  a  number  of  McCormick's 
have  been  in  use  in  this  part  of  the  country 
during  the  last  two  years,  and  to  my  inquiries 
concerning  them  I  have  received  but  one  an- 
swear  and  that  an  unfavorable  one.  The  few 
of  Hussey's  machines,  on  the  contrary,  that 
have  been  employed  within  my  ken,  have  in 
each  instance  given  entire  satisfaction.  I  do 
not  hesitate  to  say  that  when  well  managed, 
with  a  skilful  hand  at  the  rake,  in  dry  wheat  (I 
do  not  recommend  it  when  the  straw  is  wet), 
it  will,  as  compared  with  ordinary  cutting,  save 
per  acre  the  entire  expense  of  reaping,  from 
the  thorough  manner  in  which  every  stalk  is 
cut,  thus  preventing  loss  or  waste. 

"Believing,  as  I  do,  that  a  great  desidera- 
tum to  those  who  grow  wheat  upon  a  large 
scale,  is  to  be  found  in  Mr.  Hussey's  reaper,  I 
cannot  but  wish  that  both  he  and  they  may 
reap  the  benefit  of  its  general  adoption. 

"I  am,  sir, 

"Very  respectfully  your  ob't  serv't, 

"JOSIAH  COLLINS." 

163 


"Edenton,  N.  C.,  January  25th,  1848. 

"To  the  Editor  of  the  American  Farmer: 

"Dear  Sir: — Some  months  ago  I  received  a 
letter  from  you,  making  enquiries  of  me  rela- 
tive to  Hussey's  Reaping  Machine.  When  your 
letter  reached  me  I  was  on  the  eve  of  leaving 
home  for  the  summer,  and  since  my  return 
home,  my  engagements  have  been  of  such  a 
character  as  to  cause  me  until  the  present  to 
neglect  replying  to  it. 

"I  have  used  one  of  Hussey's  machines  one 
season,  and  though  under  circumstances  not 
very  favorable  for  the  machine,  I  take  pleasure 
in  stating  that  its  operation  was  satisfactory. 
During  my  harvest,  which  was  about  three 
weeks'  duration,  this  machine  was  kept  con- 
stantly at  work,  with  the  exception  of  a  day 
and  a  half,  yet  I  did  not  ascertain  how  many 
acres  it  would  reap.  Mr.  Collins,  of  Lake 
Scuppernong  also  used  one  last  season,  and 
from  him  I  learned  that  he  cut  upwards  of 
twenty  acres  a  day. 

"There  is  certainly  much  less  wheat  left  in 
the  field  by  one  of  these  machines  than  is  by 
the  ordinary  method  of  reaping  by  the  scythe 
or  reap  hook;  it  cuts  close,  lays  the  straw 
smoothly,  thus  rendering  tying  of  it  in  sheaves 
much  easier. 

154 


(From 


Modern    Rear-Delivery   Reaper. 
'Who   Invented  the   Reaper?"   by   R.   B.   Swift.) 


"I  have  witnessed  McCormick's,  which  I 
consider  a  poor  affair,  and  meriting  no  consid- 
eration except  a  dissent  from  me.  Many  of 
this  last  kind  of  reaper  found  their  way  here  a 
few  years  ago;  they  now,  or  rather  their  re- 
mains, may  be  seen  lying  in  the  field  whence 
they  will  never  be  removed. 

"THOS.  D.  WARREN." 

From  the  Richmond  Planter. 

HUSSEY'S  AND  M'CORMICK'S 
REAPERS 

"It  is  very  painful  to  be  compelled  to  inflict 
a  private  injury  in  the  discharge  of  a  public 
duty;  upon  a  particular  system  of  cultivation 
we  can  talk  and  write  without  restraint;  but 
when  we  are  called  on  to  discuss  the  merits  of 
an  invention,  upon  which  the  fortunes  of  the 
originator  may  absolutely  depend,  it  is  a  much 
more  responsible  and  delicate  office.  We  are 
aware,  too,  that  in  introducing  a  subject  of  the 
kind,  we  are  opening  the  floodgates  of  a  con- 
troversy that  is  often  hard  to  close;  we  have 
had  the  strongest  evidence  of  that  fact  in  the 
controversy  that  once  occurred  in  this  paper 
between  Messrs.  McCormick  and  Hussey,  and 
yet  it  is  to  the  relative  merits  of  the  reaping 
machines  of  these  two  gentlemen  that  we  are 

155 


compelled  again  to  draw  the  public  attention. 
Probably  not  less  than  fifteen  thousand  dollars 
has  been  spent  in  Virginia  this  summer  for 
reaping  machines,  and  it  becomes  a  subject  of 
great  importance  to  the  wheat  growing  com- 
munity at  least,  to  ascertain  how  such  a  sum 
is  annually  to  be  dispensed  to  the  greatest  ad- 
vantage. We  shall  express  no  opinion  ourself 
in  the  discussion  which  must  necessarily  follow 
the  introduction  of  this  subject,  and  we  would 
greatly  prefer  that  neither  of  the  gentlemen 
more  particularly  interested  in  the  subject 
would  appear  in  our  columns.  We  will  pub- 
lish statements  of  facts  for  either,  provided 
they  are  made  over  responsible  names,  and  are 
short  and  permanent.  As  one  of  these  facts 
we  feel  bound  to  state  that  we  acted  this  year 
as  the  agent  for  McCormick's  machine,  and  we 
have  heard  great  complaint  of  the  manner  in 
which  it  was  gotten  up;  but  it  is  but  fair  also 
to  state,  that  we  believe  Mr.  McCormick  him- 
self has  been  superintending  the  manufacture 
of  his  machine  in  the  State  of  New  York,  and 
that  probably  his  work  has  not  been  as  well 
done  as  it  would  have  been  could  he  have  seen 
to  it  in  person.  The  following  communication 
is  altogether  in  favor  of  Hussey's  machine : 

156 


"I  have  had  in  operation  on  my  plantation 
this  year  both  Hussey's  and  McCormick's 
reapers.  Now,  as  you  have  asked  me  to  fur- 
nish the  Planter  with  the  result  of  my  own  ex- 
perience and  opinion  as  to  the  comparative 
merit  of  the  two  machines,  it  is  now  at  your 
service.  I  have  had  them  both  in  operation 
(as  the  weather  would  permit)  for  the  last  fort- 
night, and  have  cut  with  the  two  rather  up- 
wards of  two  hundred  acres  of  wheat.  Both 
machines  have  been,  I  think,  very  fairly  tested 
in  all  qualities  of  grain,  from  wheat  five  feet 
and  more  in  height,  both  standing  up,  and 
lodged  and  tangled,  and  averaging,  as  is  sup- 
posed, from  thirty  and  forty  bushels,  down  to 
light,  thin  wheat,  not  averaging  more  than  four 
bushels  (being  some  galled  hills)  and  I  am 
candidly  and  decidedly  of  opinion  that  Hus- 
sey's machine  is  vastly  superior.  I  deem  it  Hussey'« 
superior,  not  only  in  the  execution  of  its  work,  Machine 

Vastly 

but  in  the  durability  of  the  machine.  So  well  Superior" 
pleased  am  I  with  its  performance  that  I  have 
ordered  another  machine  of  Hussey's  for  my 
next  harvest,  and  also  one,  and  probably  two, 
for  my  father's  plantation.  I  consider  this 
machine  invaluable  to  the  grower  of  wheat, 
and  would  recommend  every  farmer  who 
grows  even  fifty  acres  of  wheat,  to  purchase 
one.  He  may  rest  assured  that  he  will  be 

157 


pleased  with  his  purchase.     I  shall  probably 
be  in  Richmond  shortly. 

"Yours  very  respectfully, 
"T.  POLLOCK  BURGUYN. 
"Occonichee   Wigwam,   near   Halifax,   N.   C., 

"June  20,  1846. 

"For  1849  and  1850  we  will  return  and  see 
how  the  invention  progresses  on  the  broad 
prairies  and  fertile  lands  of  the  West,  where  it 
first  operated — in  1833  and  1834 — and  where, 
too,  although  the  most  luxuriant  crops  are 
grown  with  comparatively  but  little  labor,  it 
would  in  many  cases  be  next  to  impossible  to 
save  them  without  the  aid  of  this  invaluable 
invention. 

"These  certificates  embrace  the  mowing  of 
large  crops  of  grass  as  well  as  grain,  and  in 
addition,  the  cutting  of  more  than  three  hun- 
dred acres  of  hemp  in  the  harvest  of  1849  and 
1850,  by  'the  same  single  machine.' 

"Hussey's  complete  success  in  cutting  grass 
and  hemp  was  no  new  thing  ten  years  ago ;  but 
we  suppose,  like  the  grain  cutting,  in  the  view 
of  Philip  Pusey,  Esq.,  M.  P.,  'Its  perfection 
depended  on  its  being  new  only  in  England,' 
full  eighteen  years  after  it  was  effected  in 
America. 

158 


"Blackberry,  Kane  County,  111., 

"August  28,  1849. 

"This  may  certify  that  I  have  had  one  of 
Mr.  Hussey's  mowing  and  reaping  machines 
on  my  farm  this  year  cutting  wheat,  oats,  and 
grass  for  a  short  time.  I  think  nothing  can 
beat  it  cutting  timothy  grass,  and  I  intend  to 
purchase  one  for  that  purpose.  While  the 
machine  was  cutting  prairie  grass  in  my  field, 
I  cut  off  a  dry  poplar  stake,  one  inch  in  diam- 
eter, which  had  beeen  sticking  in  the  ground 
after  it  had  been  laid  off  for  a  ditch.  I  am  of 
the  opinion  that  it  will  cut  wheat  well,  where 
it  is  so  much  lodged,  or  so  foul  with  stiff  weeds 
or  corn  stalks  that  it  cannot  be  cut  with  any 
other  machine  I  have  seen  in  this  country. 
Some  of  my  neighbors  say  that  they  intend  to 
have  Mr.  Hussey's  reaper  in  preference  to  any 
.  other;  and  from  what  I  can  learn  this  opinion  A  General 
is  pretty  general  in  my  neighborhood  amongst  Opinion 
those  who  have  seen  this  machine  work,  and 
are  acquainted  with  other  machines.  My 
brother  farmers  have  had  great  trouble  with 
McCormick's  machine,  by  the  breaking  of 
sickles,  and  the  great  difficulty  or  rather  the 
impossibility  of  getting  them  repaired,  or  get- 
ting new  ones  made  when  broken,  whereas  the 
blades  of  Mr.  Hussey's  machine  can  be  made 

159 


by  any  common  blacksmith.  I  have  no  doubt 
but  Mr.  Hussey's  machine  will  come  into  gen- 
eral use.  «D  w  ANNIS." 

"Franklin  Precinct,  DeKalb  Co., 

"August  13,  1849. 

"This  may  certify  that  we  have  seen  Mr. 
O.  Hussey's  machine  cut  about  an  acre  of 
wheat,  so  badly  lodged  that  McCormick's 
reaper  could  do  nothing  with  it,  nor  could  it  be 
cradled.  Said  Hussey's  machine  cut  it  hand- 
somely, and  laid  it  in  very  good  bundles  for 
binding. 

"JOHN  SCHOOMAKER, 
"ALBERT  FIELD, 
"JOHN  M.  SCHOOMAKER, 
"DANIEL  MILLER, 
"ALBERT  FIELD,  JR., 
"ISAAC  GRILL, 
"JOHN  MILLER." 

"Berkshire,  Kane  County,  111., 

"August  6,  1849. 

"We,  the  undersigned,  having  seen  Mr. 
Hussey's  reaper  work  at  cutting  grass  and 
grain,  think  it  preferable  to  McCormick's  or 
any  other  machine  that  we  have  seen.  It  cut 
wheat  that  could  not  be  cut  with  McCormick's 

160 


reaper  or  a  cradle.     We  are  well  acquainted 
with  McCormick's  machine. 

"P.  A.  HIXBY, 
"JOHN  GRIGGS,  JR., 
"JOHN  GRIGGS, 
"HARRY  POTTER, 
"JOHN  SHIRWOOD, 
"SETH  SHIRWOOD, 
"DAVID  SHANKS, 
"ABRAHAM  SHIRWOOD, 
"JAMES  HESS, 
"ALSON  BANKER, 
"D.  C.  WRIGHT, 
"ELISHA  WRIGHT." 

"Oswego,  111.,  August  2,  1849. 

"This  may  certify  that  I  cut  a  lot  of  Black 
Sea  Wheat  with  Mr.  O.  Hussey's  Reaper;  the 
wheat  was  so  badly  lodged  that  no  McCormick 
Reaper  or  Cradle  could  cut  it;  Mr.  Hussey's 
Reaper  cut  it  clean  and  laid  the  bundles  out  of 
the  track  in  good  order  for  binding.  I  have 
seen  the  work  done  by  this  machine  in  grass; 
it  was  as  good  work  as  ever  I  saw  done  by  a 
scythe,  or  better.  For  my  choice  I  should 
rather  have  my  grass  cut  by  the  Reaper  than 
by  the  scythe.  Every  farmer  ought  to  have 
such  a  machine,  and  every  farmer  I  hear  talk 
about  it  says  the  same. 

"PHILIP  YOUNG." 

161 


"Sugar  Grove,  August  8,  1849. 

"This  may  certify  that  we  have  seen  Mr.  O. 
Hussey's  machine  operate  in  clean  grain,  and 
where  weeds  were  very  tall,  large  and  thick. 
In  the  former,  it  operated  as  well  as  any  ma- 
chine we  have  seen;  in  the  latter,  it  worked  to 
a  charm,  even  where  it  was  impracticable  to 
cut  with  one  of  McCormick's  Reapers. 

"HARRY  WHITE, 
"L.  B.  SNOW, 
"CHAUNCEY  SNOW, 
"SULLIVAN  DORR, 
"HIRAM  TUBS, 
"DWIGHT  SPENCER, 
"SAMUEL  WARD, 
"A.  LOGAN." 

"Springfield,  111.,  Dec.  25,  1850. 
"Mr.  Obed  Hussey,  Baltimore,  Md.: 

"Dear  Sir: — I  have  used  one  of  your  Mow- 
ing and  Reaping  Machines,  and  consider  it  the 
best  machine  I  ever  saw,  and  never  intend  to 
do  without  one,  if  it  is  possible  to  get  one,  even 
if  I  have  to  go  to  Baltimore  and  remain  at  the 
shop  till  one  can  be  made.  I  do  candidly  be- 
lieve if  I  had  had  one  ten  years  ago  I  would 
now  feel  like  a  much  younger  man ;  and  cheer- 
fully recommend  them  to  all  who  have  grass 

162 


or  grain  to  cut,  as  a  machine  that  will  do  their 
work  in  perfect  order,  neatness,  and  with  ease 
to  all  employed.  "JOHN  SIMMS, 

"Four  miles  west  of  Springfield,  111." 

"Utica,  Lasal  Co.,  111.,  Dec.  14, 1850. 

"Obed  Hussey,  Esq.: 

"Dear  Sir: — I  received  your  Reaping  and 
Mowing  Machine  in  time  for  harvest,  and  used 
it  for  harvesting  and  for  mowing.  I  am  fully 
satisfied  that  your  machines  are  the  best  yet 
offered  to  the  farmers  of  this  State.  I  have 
mowed  about  four  hundred  acres,  a  great  por- 
tion of  which  was  wild  prairie,  very  frequently 
running  against  stones  and  ant  heaps  with  suf- 
ficient force  to  throw  both  driver  and  raker  off 
the  machine,  without  injury  to  the  machine. 
Why  your  machine  is  preferable  to  any  other, 
is,  after  you  have  cut  your  different  kinds  of 
grain,  fully  as  well  as  can  be  done  with  any 
other  machine,  with  not  over  fifteen  minutes' 
work,  you  can  take  the  same  machine  into 
your  meadow  or  on  to  the  prairie,  and  cut  your 
grass  at  the  rate  of  ten  acres  per  day,  cutting 
closer  and  cleaner  than  can  be  done  with  a 
scythe.  With  proper  care,  your  machines  will 
last  fifteen  or  twenty  years,  with  trifling  re- 

Pairs-  "Respectfully  yours, 

"JAMES  CLARK." 

163 


"Island  Grove,  Sangamon  Co.,  111., 

"December  25,  1850. 
"Mr.  Obed  Hussey,  Baltimore,  Md.: 

"Dear  Sir : — Last  summer  I  received  two  of 
Hussey's  Mowing  and  Reaping  Machines;  one 
from  your  own  shop  in  Baltimore,  and  the 
other  manufactured  in  this  State.  Unfortu- 
nately for  me,  I  retained  the  one  manufactured 
in  this  State,  and  with  some  difficulty  succeed- 
ed in  cutting  about  two  hundred  acres  of  wheat 
and  grass.  The  one  from  your  shop  I  let  Mr. 
John  Simms  have,  who  cut  his  wheat,  oats  and 
hay  (about  seventy-five  acres)  with  perfect  sat- 
isfaction and  ease,  most  of  it  with  two  horses, 
and  without  being  obliged  to  grind  the  knives. 
After  Mr.  Simms  finished  his  harvest  he  let 
Mr.  James  D.  Smith,  of  Island  Grove,  have  it, 
who  cut  about  three  hundred  acres  of  grass 
with  it,  the  machine  giving  perfect  satisfaction. 
"Very  respectfully  yours, 

"EDWARD  J.  ENO." 

"Carrolton,  Green  Co.,  111.,  Dec.  27,  1850. 
"I  procured  one  of  Mr.  Hussey's  Reaping 
and  Mowing  Machines  from  Baltimore  last 
spring;  I  cut  eighty  acres  of  wheat,  and  ten 
acres  of  oats,  and  fifty  acres  of  timothy  with  it, 
to  my  entire  satisfaction — after  which  I  cut 
sixty  acres  of  cloverseed  with  it  in  less  than  five 

164 


days.  I  could  not  have  saved  the  cloverseed 
without  the  machine,  so  I  consider  I  saved  the 
whole  cost  of  the  machine  in  the  saving  of  the 
cloverseed  alone. 

"SAMUEL  THOMAS." 

"Springfield,  111.,  Dec.  25,  1850. 
"Mr.  Obed  Hussey,  Baltimore,  Md.: 

"Dear  Sir : — During  the  harvest  of  August, 
1849,  with  one  of  your  machines  I  cut  sixty 
acres  of  Hemp,  using  a  set  of  4y2  feet  knives 
and  guards,  and  two  teams  of  four  horses  each, 
changing  every  two  rounds,  which  cut  on  an 
average  eight  acres  per  day.  This  last  harvest, 
the  same  single  machine,  with  6  foot  guides  and 
knives,*  operated  by  the  same  force,  cut  suc- 
cessfully 250  acres  of  hemp,  or  from  10  to  12 
acres  per  day.  From  this  experience,  I  take 
pleasure  in  recommending  your  Cutters  above 
the  hemp  cradle  and  hook,  not  only  as  labor- 
saving,  by  the  expedition  with  which  they  cut, 
but  as  hemp  saving,  from  the  perfect  thorough- 
ness, evenness  and  nearness  to  the  ground  with 
which  they  do  their  work,  and  the  regular  and 
collected  form  in  which  they  leave  the  hemp 
after  being  cut. 

"Yours  respectfully, 

"EDWARD  S.  COX." 


*  The   cutters   were  lengthened   by  removing   i  board   that 
previously  reduced  the  cutting  space  to  4%  feet  in  length. 

165 


"Carrolton.Lebanon  Co.,  111.,  Sept.,  1850. 
"Mr.  O.  Hussey: 

"The  four  Reaping  and  Mowing  Machines 
you  sent  arrived  safe  and  in  good  order.  Their 
performance  far  exceeded  our  expectations,  the 
work  went  on  so  smoothly  that  we  scarcely 
knew  it  was  hay  time  and  harvest.  *  *  * 
If  your  machine  had  been  as  well  known  as 
they  are  now,  you  could  have  sold  twenty  as 
well  as  one.  "Yours, 

"JONAS  WARD." 

The  few  letters  which  follow,  taken  from  the 
American  Farmer,  and  referring  to  a  still  later 
period,  are  selected  for  their  brevity,  from 
many  others,  and  principally  from  Maryland 
and  Ohio.  It  is  considered  unnecessary  to  ex- 
tend the  list,  for  the  operation  and  character  of 
the  machine  is  too  well  and  too  widely  known 
at  this  day  to  render  it  necessary  to  the  intelli- 
gent farmer  and  general  reader,  in  any  grain 
growing  section  of  the  country,  f 


t  With  the  view  of  determining  as  far  as  possible  which  was 
the  best  Reaping  and  Mowing  Machines  for  the  farmer  to  pur- 
chase, the  Maryland  State  Agricultural  Society  in  1852  offered 
a  prize  of  one  hundred  dollars — the  largest  yet  offered  in  the 
country — for  the  best  machine,  to  be  tested  by  a  committee 
appointed  by  the  Society;  a  large  committee  of  men  of  the 
first  standing  in  the  State,  and  all  large  wheat  growers,  was 
appointed,  and  extended  notice  published  of  the  trial  to  take 
place  at  "Wye,"  the  seat  of  Col.  Edward  Lloyd,  Eastern  Shore, 
Md.,  in  July. 

166 


"Harewood,  12mo.,  8,  1852. 
"Having  used  one  of  O.  Hussey's  Reaping 
and  Mowing  Machines  during  the  last  harvest 
(1852)  I  can  state  that  in  cutting  wheat,  oats 
and  cloverseed — also  in  mowing  my  crop  of 
grass — it  has  fully  answered  my  expectations, 
doing  the  work  better  than  I  ever  had  it  done 
by  the  scythe,  and  at  much  less  expense.  The 
machine  has  been  tested  by  cutting  some  fifty 
to  sixty  acres  of  grass— quite  sufficient  to  prove 
its  complete  adaptation  to  mowing  as  well  as 
reaping.  "EDWARD  STABLER." 

"Wye  House,  Dec.  20,  1852. 

"Dear  Sir: — Having  worked  your  Reaper 
for  many  years  I  have  fully  tested  its  merits. 
It  has  proved  itself  to  be  not  only  a  wheat  sav- 
ing implement  but  a  labor  and  time  saving  one 
— these  are  all  important  to  the  farmer. 

"It  does  its  work  completely,  regardless  of 
the  position  of  the  wheat,  if  in  condition  to 
bind. 


Every  effort  was  made  by  the  Society  and  Committee  to 
give  a  fair  and  satisfactory  trial;  as  the  extent  of  crops  in  that 
fine  wheat  growing  region,  and  extensive  level  face  of  the  coun- 
try, are  unsurpassed  anywhere  for  such  an  exhibition. 

But  two  machines  were  entered  for  competition,  Mc- 
Keever's  and  Hussey's.  The  prize  was  awarded  unanimously 
to  Hussey.  Why  no  others  could  be  induced  to  attend  was  a 
matter  of  surprize  at  the  time,  and  so  remains  with  many. 

167 


"Those  you  sent  me  in  the  spring  worked 
well  through  the  harvest,  and  proved  their 
strength.  «Yours  respectfully, 

"EDW'D  LLOYD." 

"Oxford,  Md.,  Dec.  8,  1852. 
"Mr.  Obed  Hussey: 

"Sir: — I  have  used  your  Reaper  with  such 
entire  satisfaction  that  I  am  but  performing  a 
duty  to  my  brother  farmers  by  recommending 
it  in  the  strongest  terms. 

"For  sixteen  years  I  have  used  a  Reaping 
Machine,  and  know  from  experience  that  the 
most  important  qualities  are  strength  and  sim- 
plicity. In  these  respects  your  machine  is 
superior  to  any  other,  and  is  the  only  one  I 
have  seen  which  can  be  safely  entrusted  to  the 
management  of  ordinary  overseers,  with  negro 
laborers.  "Yours,  etc., 

"TENCH  TILGHMAN." 

"Hayes,  Montgomery  Co.,  Md., 

"December  7,  1852. 

"I  purchased  in  the  year  1851  one  of  Mr. 
Obed  Hussey's  Reaping  Machines.  I  used  it 
that  year  and  this  year  in  cutting  my  grain;  I 
was  pleased  with  the  machine;  I  consider  it  a 
valuable  implement,  and  hope  never  to  be  with- 
out one  while  I  continue  to  be  a  farmer.  My 

168 


machine  was  used  in  cutting  wheat  and  oats — 
it  was  not  designed  for  grass.  I  employed  it 
about  half  the  day,  and  reaped  about  ten  acres 
of  land  in  grain — the  rest  of  the  day  was  de- 
voted to  the  securing  of  the  grain ;  I  used  four 
horses.  My  machine,  I  believe,  was  of  the 
smallest  size,  and  was  without  front  wheels; 
with  wheels  it  would  have  been  a  relief  to  the 
horses. 

"I  cannot  speak  of  the  relative  value  of  this 
machine  compared  with  others,  having  never 
seen  any  Reaping  Machines  but  Hussey's  at 
work.  I  do  not  think  I  could  be  induced  to 
return  to  the  old  mode  of  cutting  grain  by  the 
scythe  and  cradle. 

"Respectfully  yours,  etc., 
"ROBERT  P.  DUNLOP." 

"Forest  Hill,  King  and  Queens  Co.,  Va., 

"December  24,  1852. 
"Mr.  O.  Hussey: 

"Sir: — It  gives  me  pleasure  to  state  that  I 
used  your  Reaping  Machine  in  my  late  harvest 
with  great  satisfaction.  It  fully  equals  my  ex- 
pectation as  a  labor-saving  implement,  and  does 
the  work  better  than  can  be  done  by  the  cradle. 
I  would  farther  state  that  the  seven  which  were 
purchased  along  with  mine  for  my  relations 

169 


and  friends  of  this  country  have  given  in  every 
instance,  entire  satisfaction. 

"Very  respectfully, 

"WM.  D.  GRESHAM." 

"To  the  Editor  of  the  American  Farmer: 

"Dear  Sir: — Having  had  a  fair  opportunity 
of  observing  the  performance  of  Mr.  Hussey's 
celebrated  'Reaper'  on  my  farm  last  season, 
under  circumstances  peculiarly  calculated  to 
test  its  efficiency,  I  think  it  not  inappropriate 
to  bear  my  testimony  in  its  favor. 

"I  finished  cutting  my  grain  more  than  a 
week  ago.  The  grain  was  not  only  blown  as 
Hat  as  possible,  but  was  tangled  and  twisted 
together,  and  lying  in  every  direction ;  so  much 
so  that  it  would  have  been  impossible  to  cut 
a  large  portion  of  it  with  the  cradle.  No  one 
who  saw  the  field  believed  the  machine  could 
possibly  succeed. 

"I  take  great  pleasure  in  stating  that  its 
success  was  perfect  and  entire.  It  cut  and 
gathered  the  grain  in  the  very  worst  spots 
almost  as  well  as  that  which  was  standing ;  and 
I  was  thus  enabled  to  mow  my  crop  in  about 
one-half  the  time  the  old  fashioned  method 
would  have  required,  thereby  effecting  a  large 
pecuniary  gain.  It  cuts  the  grass  as  evenly 
and  as  close  as  the  most  expert  mower.  I  need 

170 


scarcely  say  that  I  am  perfectly  satisfied  with 
it.    I  subscribe  myself  yours,  etc., 

"AQUILLA  TABOT." 

"Alexandria,  Va.,  12  mo.,  11,  1852. 

"It  gives  me  much  pleasure  to  state  that  I 
have  had  in  use  on  my  farm  in  Montgomery 
County,  Md.,  for  the  past  two  seasons,  one  of 
'Hussey's  Reapers,'  and  its  operation  has  given 
me  entire  satisfaction  in  every  respect.  It 
appears  to  combine  the  three  qualities  so  im- 
portant to  the  farmer,  efficiency,  durability  and 
economy.  I  can,  with  great  sincerity,  recom- 
mend its  general  adoption. 

"BENJAMIN  HALLOWELL. 

"To  Obed  Hussey: 

"Dear  Sir : — Having  used  one  of  your  Reap- 
ers upon  land,  a  great  deal  of  which  was  hilly, 
stony  and  rough,  I  take  pleasure  in  saying  that 
it  has  given  entire  satisfaction,  and  proved  to 
be  a  very  durable,  well  built,  and  great  labor 
saving  machine.  «Respectfully> 

"A.  B.  DAVIS." 
"Greenwood,  Mont.  Co.,  Md.,  Dec.  20,  1852.'* 

"Pickaway  County,  O.,  July  1,  1851. 
"I  made  an  experiment  this  season  in  my 
field  of  testing  the  McCormick  and  Hussey 
Reapers.    I  tried  each  fairly  and  under  similar 

171 


circumstances.  I  am  satisfied  that  Hussey's  is 
decidedly  the  best  Reaper,  both  as  to  cutting 
grain  and  durability.  The  objections  made  to 
Hussey's  Reaper  by  agents  and  manufacturers 
of  other  machines  I  do  not  find,  upon  trial,  to 
exist  in  any  one  particular. 

"WM.  STAGE." 

"We,  the  undersigned,  present  at  the  trial, 
concur  in  Mr.  Stage's  statement:  Z.  Pritchett, 
John  Reber,  Philip  Stuart,  Isaac  Stage,  John 
Hogeland,  Michael  Eyer." 

"Salem  Tp.,  Champaign  Co.,  O.,  July,  1851. 

"I  have  worked  with  McCormick  and  Hus- 
sey's Reapers  three  seasons,  and  unqualifiedly 
pronounce  Hussey's  the  best  machine.  It  cuts 
cleaner  and  faster,  and  leaves  the  grain  in  bet- 
ter order  on  the  ground ;  and  this  is  the  opinion 
of  every  hand  in  giving  an  expression  of  the 
comparative  merits  of  the  two  machines. 

"THOS.  OUTRAM." 

"Union  Township,  Champaign  County,  O., 

"July,  1851. 

"I  have  for  the  past  four  seasons  worked 
Hussey's  Reaper,  and  unhesitatingly  pro- 
nounce it  vastly  superior  to  McCormick's  or 
any  other  Reaper  I  have  seen  used. 

"WILLIAM  T.  ZOMBRO." 

178 


"Salem  Township,  Champaign  County,  O., 

"July,  1851. 

"I  have  had  Hussey's  Reaper  used  on  my 
farm.  It  will  cut  20  acres  of  the  heaviest  wheat 
per  day,  with  ease.  I  consider  it  far  superior 
to  the  McCormick  Reaper. 

"JOSHUA  BUFFINGTON." 

"Ross  County,  Ohio,  July,  1851. 
"I  have  used  Hussey's  Reaper,  and  consider 
it  an  invaluable  machine.    I  have  seen  McCor- 
mick's  Reaper  operate,  and  am  of  opinion  that 
Hussey's  is  the  best  machine. 

"D.  M'CONNELL." 

"Union  Township,  Champaign  County,  O., 

"August,  1851. 

"I  have  used  Hussey's  Reaper  for  four 
years.  I  prefer  it  to  every  other  machine.  I 
do  not  have  to  drive  fast,  and  the  raking  is  the 
easiest  work  in  the  field. 

"JOHN  EARSOM." 

"Salem  Township,  Champaign  County,  O., 

"August,  1851. 

"I  bought  a  Hussey  Reaper  this  season,  and 
it  has  given  the  best  satisfaction.  I  cut  wheat 
that  was  down  as  badly  as  any  I  ever  saw.  It 
operated  well  by  driving  in  a  slow  walk.  My 
hands  would  rather  rake  than  bind. 

"JOHN  LEE." 

173 


"Union  Township,  Champaign  County,  O., 

"July,  1851. 

"I  have  used  for  five  years  Hussey's  Reaper. 
It  is  a  labor  and  grain  saving  machine.  It  is 
a  much  better  machine  than  McCormick's,  in 
several  particulars;  it  is  more  substantial,  not 
so  liable  to  injury,  and  will  cut  faster  and 
cleaner.  I  cut  this  season,  with  three  horses, 
sixteen  acres  of  heavy  wheat,  in  five  hours  and 
thirty  minutes.  "REZIN  C.  WILSON." 

"Bergen,  September  1,  1851. 

"This  is  to  certify  that  I  have  for  three  sea- 
sons used  one  of  Hussey's  Reaping  Machines, 
which  I  purchased  at  the  Genesee  Seed  Store, 
and  that  it  gives  perfect  satisfaction.  I  have 
cut  my  wheat  when  it  was  very  badly  lodged, 
much  faster,  better  and  cheaper  than  it  could 
have  been  done  in  any  other  way.  I  had  one 
of  McCormick's,  but  left  it  in  the  road,  a  use- 
less article,  as  I  consider  it,  having  tried  for 
three  years  to  use  it  without  success. 

"I  consider  Hussey's  machine  just  the  thing 
for  our  farmers,  and  I  could  not  now,  after 
having  proved  its  merits,  be  induced  to  be 
without  one.  "NOAH  WILSON." 

With  a  few  general  remarks  as  to  the  repu- 
tation of  Reaping  Machines  in  England,  and 

174 


on  the  authority  of  the  annexed  English  pub- 
lications, we  take  leave  of  the  subject. 

At  the  trial  for  which  the  "Great  Council 
Medal"  was  awarded,  but  which  no  practical 
farmer  in  this  country  would  consider  as  any 
trial  at  all,  being  merely  the  attempt  to  cut  a 
small  space  in  green  and  wet  grain,  and  during 
the  temporary  absence  of  Hussey,  his  machine 
was  operated  by  ignorant  laborers  of  the 
"Chrystal  Palace,"  and  who  had  never  before 
seen  a  reaping  machine. 

This  did  not  satisfy  the  English  farmers; 
complaints  were  soon  heard  of  injustice,  par- 
tiality, and  unfairness.  It  compelled  C.  H.  Mc- 
Cormick  or  his  agents  to  offer  a  challenge, 
which  was  promptly  accepted  by  Hussey;  and 
before  the  Cleveland  Agricultural  Society  a 
tolerably  fair  trial  was  had  of  the  rival  ma- 
chines, though  neither  the  grain  nor  ground 
was  then  in  a  suitable  state.  For  the  decision 
of  twelve  prominent  men  and  practical  farm- 
ers we  refer  to  the  annexed  English  account 
for  the  complete  triumph  of  the  unmedalled 
machine. 

In  an  interview  with  an  extensive  agri- 
cultural implement  maker  of  Yorkshire — him- 
self an  inventor  of  many  valuable  implements, 
and  to  no  small  extent  a  rival — he  spoke  of 
Obed  Hussey  as  a  man  who  conferred  honor 
on  his  own  country;  as  well  by  his  genius  and 

175 


talents,  as  by  his  integrity  of  character.  This 
feeling  was  alike  honorable  to  the  gentleman 
who  gave  it  expression,  and  just  to  an  Amer- 
ican citizen. 

Obed  Hussey  is  perhaps  the  only  American 
who  ever  waved  the  "Stars  and  Stripes"  on  the 
soil  of  England  [placed  there,  too,  at  different 
Mr.  times,  on  his  machine,  by  Englishmen]  or  who 
Hussey's  could  do  it  without  a  strong  feeling  of  envy 
Distinction  an(j  jeaiousv  being  engendered.  Even  English- 
men, jealous  as  they  are  known  to  be,  viewed 
Hussey  as  a  public  benefactor,  and  his  mission 
as  one  calculated  either  directly  or  indirectly 
to  benefit  all  classes.  Yet  in  his  own  country, 
which  he  has  so  signally  benefited,  he  is  com- 
pelled to  supplicate  for  years,  and  as  yet  in 
vain,  for  rights,  that  others,  with  not  a  tithe  of 
his  claim  and  merit,  but  with  more  ample 
means  perhaps,  or  more  influential  friends, 
succeed  in  obtaining.  It  is  a  reproach  to  the 
age  and  to  the  Halls  of  Legislation.  When  it 
was  supposed  this  great  invention  was  per- 
fected in  England,  many  years  ago — though 
not  successful,  as  was  subsequently  proved — 
the  Nation  took  the  matter  in  hand,  and  Par- 
liament voted  a  reward  to  its  author. 

At  the  great  Agricultural  Exhibition  for 
"Bath  and  the  West  of  England,"  held  at  Ply- 
mouth in  1853,  the  Plymouth  Mail  states: 
["the  interest  and  excitement  created  by  the 

176 


trial  of  Reaping  Machines  was  very  great,  and 
the  crowd  of  persons  assembled  to  witness 
their  performance  was  immense"] — that  Hus- 
sey  won  the  prize  for  Reaping,  by  acclamation, 
over  all  competitors — the  only  other  American 
machine  present,  McCormick's  included;  and 
an  eye  witness  states  that  three  cheers  were 
proposed  for  Mr.  Hussey  by  Sir  Thomas  Ack- 
land,  the  President,  and  member  of  Parliament, 
which  was  responded  to  by  thousands,  and 
without  a  dissenting  voice ;  that  his  reaper  was 
crowned  with  laurel  by  the  Judges,  and  the 
"Stars  and  Stripes"  waved  in  triumph  twenty- 
five  feet  high  over  American  ingenuity  and  en- 
terprise on  English  soil. 

At  this  trial  it  was  again  demonstrated  to 
the  agriculturists  of  Great  Britain  by  Obed 
Hussey  [and  not  the  first  time,  though  he  was 
the  first  to  do  it]  that  his  machine  would  cut 
their  grass  quite  as  perfectly  as  their  "corn." 
The  Mail  goes  on  to  say :  "A  mowing  machine  A  Mowing 
was  so  remote  from  the  expectations  and  hopes  Ma5*I?1e 

as  Well  as 

of  the  Society,  that  no  prize  was  offered  for  a  Reaper 
one ;  yet  Mr.  Hussey  was  prepared  with  a  mow- 
ing machine,  which  was  taken  to  an  adjoining 
field  of  meadow  grass  and  clover  mixed.  The 
people  followed,  but  evidently  with  no  expecta- 
tion of  being  gratified.  The  machine  mower 
was  put  in  action,  and  to  the  admiration  of 
every  one,  it  cut  the  grass  with  an  evenness  and 

177 


precision  which  is  truly  surprising,  being  more 
close  and  even  than  a  scythe.  The  grass  left 
behind  the  machine  was  quite  evenly  spread, 
and  where  it  was  not  so,  it  lay  so  light  and 
open  that  the  use  of  the  tending  machine  was 
scarcely  necessary.  The  admiration  of  the 
truly  astonishing  performance  was  universal. 

"The  cutting  the  rye  was  looked  for,  but 
mowing  the  grass  took  every  one  by  surprise. 
Thus  a  great  desideratum  has  been  achieved; 
the  farmer  has  now  only  to  gear  up  his  horses 
and  take  a  ride  through  his  meadow,  and  his 
grass  is  cut." 

Again,  at  the  Royal  Agricultural  Society's 
Exhibition,  held  at  Lincoln,  the  present  season, 
the  Mark  Lane  Express  states  that  Hussey's 
machine  won  the  prize  over  all  competitors; 
and  admits  that  Bell's  machine  was  "at  last 
fairly  beaten." 

Is  there  an  American  who  can  read  these 
accounts  who  does  not  feel  indebted  to  the 
man  who,  solely  by  his  own  perseverance  and 
skill,  has  added  lustre  to  his  country's  renown 
in  the  peaceful  walks  of  life?  If  the  same  man, 
as  a  "warrior  in  hostile  array,"  had  raised  the 
same  flag  in  triumph  on  the  same  soil,  how 
would  his  countrymen  have  rewarded  him? 
Doubtless  by  a  "vote  of  thanks  by  both  Houses 
of  Congress,"  together  with  a  sword  and  gold 
medal,  if  not  a  monument  in  addition! 

178 


Should  not  those  be  equally  honored  and 
rewarded  by  the  Country,  who  are  engaged  in 
the  arts  and  in  agriculture;  who  devote  their 
energies  to  add  to  the  comfort  and  happiness 
of  their  fellow  man,  as  those  engaged  in  shed- 
ding blood,  making  widows  and  orphans  to 
mourn  for  their  untimely  bereavement,  and 
who  literally  for  hire,  not  patriotism,  and  with 
the  spirit  demons,  seek  to  slay  and  destroy? 

We  fully  believe  so;  for  fame  and  renown 
in  arms  are  rarely  or  never  acquired,  except  by 
entailing  misery  and  distress  on  our  fellow 
beings,  and  engendering  the  worst  feelings  and 
passions  of  our  nature. 

But  we  hope  for  the  advent  of  better  days ; 
when,  if  the  political  sword  is  not  literally 
beaten  into  a  plough-share,  and  the  partisan 
spear  turned  into  a  pruning  hook,  the  inventive 
genius  and  talent  of  our  countrymen  shall  be 
more  aided  and  better  rewarded  by  Govern- 
ment, in  its  praiseworthy  efforts  "for  the  diffu- 
sion of  knowledge  among  men,"  in  all  that 
really  ennobles  the  mind,  and  benefits  the 
whole  human  family.  Such,  at  least,  is  the 
earnest  wish  and  desire  of 

A  FARMER  AND  MECHANIC. 


179 


HUSSEY'S  REAPING  AND  MOW- 
ING  MACHINE  IN  ENGLAND 

"In  presenting  the  following  pages  for  con- 
sideration of  the  farmers  of  the  country,  the 
subscriber  has  confined  himself  strictly  to  mat- 
ters selected  from  English  papers,  which  will 
speak  for  itself.  As  a  short  explanation  from 
me  will  be  looked  for,  I  will  merely  state  that 
at  the  trial  in  presence  of  the  Exhibition  Jury, 
An  Unfair  Mr.  McCormick's  machine  was  operated  by  an 
Dls"  experienced  hand  sent  from  the  United  States, 
while  mine  was  managed  by  English  laborers 
of  the  lower  class,  who  were  total  strangers  to 
it,  and  had  never  seen  it  in  operation.  The  trial 
was  made  in  unripe  wheat  on  a  rainy  day.  My 
machine  was  very  improperly  adjusted  for  the 
work  and  wrongly  put  together,  in  consequence 
of  which  the  ignorant  raker  failed  to  deliver 
the  sheaves,  and  it  stopped  as  a  matter  of 
course,  and  was  immediately  laid  aside,  after 
cutting  but  a  few  feet.  My  machine  was  never 
tried  in  presence  of  that  Jury  by  any  other 
hands,  or  in  any  other  condition,  myself  not 
being  in  England. 

"It  was  on  such  a  trial  that  the  Exhibition 
medal  was  disposed  of,  and  with  what  justice 
the  reader  can  judge  by  reading  the  following 
pages.  On  my  arrival  in  England  I  took  my 

180 


0  ? 

<  £ 

«   2 
&  O 


t    E 
>     o 


machine  into  the  field  that  it  might  work  its 
way  into  public  favor  as  it  best  could.  After 
being  exhibited  in  several  places,  its  rising 
fame  appeared  to  produce  some  effect,  as  it  will 
appear  by  the  following  in  the  Windsor  and 
Eaton  Express  of  November  8,  1851 : 

"Alluding  to  the  astonishing  and  unexpect- 
ed performance  of  my  Reaper,  it  says :  'By  this 
unlocked  for  turn  of  events,  the  proprietors 
of  McCormick's  machine  found  that  their  su- 
premacy was  no  longer  undisputed,  and  that 
the  necessity  was  laid  upon  them  to  look  to 
their  laurels;  they  therefore  came  boldly  for- 
ward, and  threw  down  the  gauntlet!' 

"That  farmers  who  are  acquainted  with  my  How 
reaper  may  understand  why  it  failed  to  per- 

„  .  ,  V.        Received 

form  well  in  the  hands  of  strangers  at  the  Ex-  a  Mcdaj 

hibition  trial  where  McCormick  got  the  medal, 
it  will  be  necessary  for  me  to  say  that  when  the 
machine  was  sent  from  Baltimore  it  was  set 
to  cut  high.  That  when  the  inexperienced 
hands  undertook  to  make  it  cut  low,  they 
pitched  down  the  cutters  by  putting  on  the 
tongue,  not  knowing  any  other  way  to  lower  it. 
In  doing  so  the  hind  part  of  the  platform  was 
of  course  raised  high.  In  this  condition  the  un- 
practiced  raker  failed  to  push  the  heavy  wet 
wheat  off  up  an  inclined  plane ;  and  as  a  matter 
of  course  the  machine  choaked,  and  for  the 
same  reason  that  a  mill  will  choak  when  the 

181 


corn  goes  in  faster  than  the  meal  comes  out. 
A  skillful  hand  would  have  lowered  the  cut  at 
the  axle  of  the  machine,  and  brought  the  plat- 
form horizontal  or  lowest  at  the  rear,  as  it 
should  be  in  cutting  wet  grain. 

"The  following  pages  will  show  the  result, 
the  authenticity  of  which,  if  doubted,  will  be 
proved  by  the  production  of  the  originals  in 
my  possession.  «OBED  HUSSEY. 

"Baltimore,  Md.,  Jan.  1,  1852." 

From  the  Hull  [England]  Advertiser,  September  5,  1851. 

"At  the  annual  meeting  on  Mr.  Mechi's 
Farm  at  Tiptree  Heath,  a  few  weeks  ago,  a 
brief  report  of  which  appeared  in  the  Hull  Ad- 
vertiser at  the  time,  several  reaping  machines 
were  tested,  the  result  then  being  that  one 
manufactured  and  invented  by  Mr.  McCormick, 
of  America,  was  the  only  one  which  was  con- 
sidered to  have  done  its  work  properly. 
Amongst  those  tried  was  one  invented  and 
manufactured  by  Mr.  O.  Hussey,  Baltimore, 
Md.  (U.  S.)  which,  in  the  opinion  of  gentle- 
men then  present,  did  not  fully  accomplish  the 
object  in  view.  It  should,  however,  be  men- 
tioned, that  while  Mr.  McCormick's  machine 
had  on  that  trial  the  advantage  of  the  superin- 
tendence of  persons  intimately  acquainted  with 
its  mechanism,  and  who  had  been  accustomed 

188 


to  the  working  of  the  machine  for  some  years, 
Mr.  Hussey's  invention  was  (in  the  absence 
of  the  inventor)  in  the  hands  of  persons  entire- 
ly unacquainted  with  the  proper  mode  of  work- 
ing it.  Since  then  Mr.  Hussey  himself  has 
come  over  to  England  in  order  to  superintend 
his  machine,  and  the  result  has  been  that  it  is 
now  brought  out  to  receive  a  thorough  trial  of 
its  merits. 

"The  trial  of  Wednesday,  however,  was  the 
best.  It  took  place  in  a  Held  belonging  to  Mr. 
Coskill,  Grovehill  Lane,  Beverly.  There  was 
assembled  during  the  day  a  great  number  of 
farmers  and  gentlemen  interested  in  agricul- 
ture, who  witnessed  the  trial  with  great  in- 
terest. 

"The  wheat  in  this  case  was  very  much 
'laid;'  indeed  in  many  places  it  was  almost 
flat  on  the  ground.  It  therefore  afforded  one  of 
the  best  opportunities  for  judging  of  the  capa- 
bilities of  the  machine  under  disadvantageous 
circumstances  that  could  possibly  occur. 

"On  the  whole,  the  conclusion  come  to  was 
that  the  reaping  was  done  as  well  by  machine 
as  by  hand.  No  one  doubted  for  a  moment 
that  it  would  cut  corn  well  where  it  was  stand- 
ing; but  some  farmers  thought  it  would  not 
equal  the  scythe  where  the  corn  was  laid.  The 
result,  however,  showed  the  contrary,  and 
every  person  acknowledged  that  it  had  suc- 

183 


ceeded  admirably.  After  cutting  a  large  quan- 
tity of  wheat,  the  machine  was  taken  into  an- 
other field,  and  after  a  slight  alteration,  set  to 
work  to  cut  clover.  We  understand  that  on 
the  day  before  previous  to  coming  to  Hull,  it 
had  been  tried  on  clover  and  cut  it  extremely 
well. 

Winning  Its  "As  the  machine  cut  along  it  was  followed 
Own  Way  closely  by  groups  of  farmers  striving  hard  to 
find  flaws  in  its  performance.  But  they  could 
not.  On  the  contrary,  in  those  places  where 
the  corn  was  most  'laid,'  and  where,  conse- 
quently, the  greatest  difficulty  must  occur  in 
the  cutting,  the  manner  in  which  the  reaper  did 
its  work  elicited  their  loudest  approbation. 
'Why,'  said  one  burly  old  gentleman  by  our 
side,  'a  man  with  a  scythe  could  never  cut  it 
like  that.'  'It  is  wonderful,'  said  another. 

From  the  Morning  Advertiser,  September  12,  1851. 

"On  Monday  last,  the  public  trial  of  Hus- 
sey's  patent  Reaping  Machine  took  place  with 
the  permission  of  his  Grace,  the  Duke  of  Marl- 
borough,  on  his  Grace's  estate  of  Blenheim, 
near  Woodstock,  Oxfordshire,  and  also,  on  the 
adjoining  one  of  Mr.  Southern,  one  of  the  most 
considerable  landed  proprietors  of  the  country. 
A  large  assemblage  of  the  Agriculturists  of  the 
highest  class  attracted  by  the  celebrity  which 
this  ingenious  and  efficient  contrivance  has  ac- 

184 


quired  for  itself  in  a  course  of  successful  ex- 
periments performed  last  week  in  Yorkshire, 
were  present  to  witness  the  trial,  mostly  from 
Oxfordshire  and  the  adjoining  counties,  but 
many  from  a  considerable  distance,  and  all  of 
them  concurred  in  the  most  ready  acknowl- 
edgments of  its  advantages. 

"The  reaping  commenced  at  11  o'clock  in 
the  barley  field,  the  machine  being  drawn  by 
two  fine  chestnut  horses,  lent  by  his  Grace  for 
the  purpose  of  the  experiment,  in  which  he 
took  the  deepest  interest,  following  the  reaper 
in  a  car,  and  watching  with  evident  satisfac- 
tion, the  ease  and  rapidity  with  which  the 
blades  cut  down  the  golden  produce  of  the  field.  The  Duke 
The  crop  was  by  no  means  one  calculated  to  of  Marl- 

borough's 

favor  the  experiment.  On  the  contrary,  some  Test 
of  it  was  down  and  much  laid.  It  was  cut 
down,  however,  with  great  regularity  and 
speed,  and  the  general  evenness  of  the  stubble 
was  the  subject  of  general  remark.  As  the  ma- 
chine passed  on,  hewing  its  way  at  a  smart 
pace  through  the  dense  mass  of  stalks,  the 
crowd  of  eager  observers  rushed  after  it,  and 
many  were  the  cheers  with  which  it  was  wel- 
comed. Occasionally,  to  satisfy  the  ideas  of 
the  more  fastidious,  the  level  of  the  cutters  was 
changed,  so  as  to  leave  a  greater  or  less  length 

185 


of  stubble,  and  it  was  evident  to  all  that  in  this 
respect  the  machine  was  susceptible  of  the 
nicest  adjustment.  Some  times  at  the  end  of 
a  turn  it  was  rested  to  give  the  farmers  an  op- 
portunity of  inspecting  it,  which  they  seemed 
never  tired  of  doing,  and  then  it  was  turned 
round  at  right  angles  to  cut  in  the  cross  direc- 
tion. In  the  experiments  upon  barley,  it 
showed  itself  capable  of  reaping  the  enormous 
space  of  fifteen  acres,  which  we  believe  is  from 
eight  to  nine  times  the  power  of  the  most  vig- 
orous and  skillful  reaper.  Afterwards  the  ma- 
chine was  taken  into  a  large  field  of  clover, 
which  it  cut  to  within  two  inches  of  the  ground, 
and  with  still  greater  rapidity. 

"His  Grace  repeatedly  expressed  his  admi- 
ration of  the  powers  of  the  apparatus,  and  con- 
gratulated some  of  the  agricultural  gentlemen 
present  with  him  on  the  prospects  of  greater 
economy  and  security  in  harvesting  which  it 
afforded  them.  These  opinions  were  generally 
entertained  upon  the  ground,  and  yesterday  at 
Bishop's  Startford,  in  Hartfordshire,  the  farm- 
ers of  that  part  of  the  country  witnessed  a  sim- 
ilar experiment,  attended  with  results  precisely 
similar,  and  which  gave  them  the  same  satis- 
faction." 

186 


The  following  testimonial  was  given  by  the 
Duke  of  Marlborough: 

"Tuesday,  September  9th,  1851. 
"Having  yesterday  witnessed  the  working 
of  the  American  Reaping  Machine,  patented  by 
Mr.  Hussey,  and  being  requested  to  give  my 
opinion  upon  its  execution,  I  state  that  it  per- 
formed its  work  admirably,  laying  the  corn 
when  cut  very  neatly  for  tying  up,  and  leaving 
the  stubble  very  regular. 

"MARLBOROUGH." 

Following  upon  these  various  successes,  an 
advertisement  from  the  proprietors  of  McCor- 
mick's  Machine  appeared  in  the  public  papers, 
as  follows: 

MR.  M'CORMICK'S  AMERICAN 
REAPER 

"Public  Challenge  to  Makers  and  Venders 
of  Reaping  Machines:    We,  the  undersigned, 
agents  for  Mr.  McCormick,  having  observed 
sundry  advertisements  and  circulars  complain-  j|,e 
ing  of  the  decision  of  the  Jurors  of  the  Great   Challenge 
Exhibition  of  1851  in  favor  of  Mr.  McCormick's 
Reaper,  and  of  the  reports  given  in  the  public 
journals  of  the  trials  which  led  to  such  de- 
cision, do  hereby  give  notice  to  Messrs.  Wm. 
Dray  &  Co.,  Messrs.  Garrett  &  Son,  Mr.  O. 

187 


Hussey,  and  all  other  makers  and  venders  of 
Reaping  Machines  whatsoever,  that  M'COR- 
MICK'S  REAPER  will  be  tried  at  the  Cleve- 
land Society's  Show  at  Marton,  Middlesbrough, 
near  Stockton-on-Tees,  on  the  25th  inst.,  and 
publicly  CHALLENGE  them  or  any  of  them, 
to  meet  us  there,  with  their  machines,  for  the 
purpose  of  a  comparative  trial  of  the  respective 
merits  of  each,  to  be  determined  by  the  Chair- 
man and  Council  of  the  Cleveland  Society,  or 
by  such  Judge  or  Judges  as  the  said  Society 
may  appoint.  BURGESS  &  KEY,  103  New- 
gate Street,  London." 

The  Challenge  was  immediately  accepted. 

MR.  HUSSEY'S  AMERICAN 
REAPER 

"In  answer  to  an  advertisement  which  ap- 
peared in  the  Times  of  the  18th,  from  Messrs. 
Burgess  &  Key,  giving  us  a  PUBLIC  CHAL- 
LENGE to  a   TRIAL  of  the  AMERICAN 
The  REAPING  MACHINES,  we  hereby  announce 
Acceptance  ^^  we  shall  winingiy  ACCEPT  the  SAME, 

and  on  the  25th  inst.  we  shall  be  prepared  at 
the  Cleveland  Society's  Show,  Marton,  Mid- 
dlesborough,  near  Stockton-on-Tees,  to  prove 
to  the  Agricultural  World  the  superiority  of 
HUSSEY'S  REAPER  for  general  farming 
purposes.  We  stipulate,  however,  that  the  Ma- 

188 


As  no  report  was  made  of  the  trial  on  the 
first  day,  the  following  may  be  relied  upon : 

From  the    Gateshead    Observer,   September   27,    1851. 

"It  was  curious  to  see  on  the  soil  of  a  Cleve- 
land farm  two  implements  of  agriculture  lying 
side  by  side  in  rivalry,  respectively  marked, 
'McCormick,  inventor,  Chicago,  Illinois,'  'Hus- 
sey,  inventor,  Baltimore,  Maryland* — America 
competing  with  America,  on  English  soil. 

"Mr.  Hussey  led  off.  An  attempt  was  made 
to  keep  back  the  eager  crowd ;  but  their  curios- 
ity was  irrepressible ;  they  flocked  in  upon  the 
machine  so  that  the  experiment  could  not  be 
properly  performed,  nor  could  the  jury  duly 
discharge  their  duties.  P.  C.  Thompson  did 
his  very  best;  he  was  all  but  everywhere  at 
once;  but  what  avails  a  police  force,  one 
strong,  against  a  concourse  of  Yorkshire  yeo- 
manry and  clowns?  It  was  requisite  that  he 
should  have  recruits,  and  a  body  of  self -elected 
'specials'  came  to  his  aid,  who  succeeded  in 
procuring  approach  to  a  clear  course.  Mr. 
Hussey  then  took  his  seat  anew,  and  his  ma- 
chine cut  down  a  breadth  of  wheat  from  end 
to  end  of  the  field.  It  seemed  to  us  to  do  its 
work  neatly  and  well.  The  wheat  was  cleverly 
delivered  from  the  teeth  of  the  reaper,  and 
handed  over  to  the  binders  by  the  rake." 

191 


To  William   Dray  and  Company. 

"Stockton-on-Tees,  September  27th,  1851. 

"Sir — Having  been  in  communication  with 
you  relative  to  the  trial  of  your  Reaper  against 
McCormick's,  and  feeling  deeply  interested  in 
the  introduction  of  the  new  implement  into 
this  district,  particularly  one  of  so  much  im- 
portance as  a  Reaping  Machine,  I  think  it  is  not 
probably  out  of  place  in  me  if  I  give  you  the 
result  of  my  observations  during  the  two  trials 
which  have  taken  place.  From  the  fact  that 
McCormick's  Machine  obtained  the  prize  at  the 
Great  Exhibition  (though  I  do  not  pin  my 
faith  upon  awards  made  by  Agricultural  and 
other  societies)  the  letter  of  Mr.  Pusey's,  in 
the  Royal  Agricultural  Society's  Journal,  the 
various  newspaper  reports,  etc.,  etc.,  it  was  nat- 
ural for  me  to  be  predisposed  in  favor  of  Mc- 
Cormick's Machine;  indeed  Mr.  M.  had  a 
prestige  in  his  favor,  which  of  course  operated 
against  the  'Little  Hussey.'  Previous  to  start- 
ing, at  Marton,  on  Thursday,  the  gentlemen 
representing  McCormick's  machine  expressed 
themselves  desirous  of  testing  the  machines 
early  in  the  morning  when  the  dew  was  on, 
believing  that  their  machine  would  cut  the 
grain  under  such  circumstances,  and  that  yours 
would  not.  Well,  on  Thursday  we  had  a  deluge 
rain,  the  surface  of  the  land  was  very  soft,  and 

192 


chines  shall  be  tested,  not  only  on  a  particular 
patch  of  good  upstanding  grain,  where  they 
might,  perhaps,  prove  equal,  but  on  an  average 
variety  of  conditions,  as  to  short  and  laid  corn, 
etc.,  such  as  the  farmer  will  usually  meet  with. 
Its  capabilities  for  cutting  green  crops,  such  as 
clover,  etc.,  shall  also  be  proved.  It  must  be 
evident  to  the  Farming  Public  that  the  Reap- 
ing Machine  which  will  cut  a  crop  of  the  great- 
est variety  and  difference  of  condition  must 
possess  the  greatest  merit.  WM.  DRAY  & 
CO.,  Agricultural  Warehouse,  Swan-Lane, 
London  Bridge." 

Accordingly  the  matter  was  arranged,  and 
the  following  gentlemen  were  called  upon  to 
act  as  jurors: 

Henry  Stephen  Thompson,  Esq.,  of  Moat 
Hall,  Foreman;  Mr.  Wm.  Lister  of  Dunsa 
Bank;  Mr.  Jno.  Booth  of  Killerby;  Mr.  John 
Parrington,  of  Brancepeth;  Mr.  Wm.  Weth- 
erell,  of  Kirkbridge,  Darlington;  Mr.  Robert 
Hymers,  of  Marton;  Mr.  Christopher  Cobson, 
Linthorpe;  Mr.  Robert  Fawcitt,  of  Ormsby; 
Mr.  Joseph  Parrington,  of  Cross  Beck;  Mr. 
John  Outhwaite,  of  Bainesse;  Mr.  Geo.  Reed, 
Hutton  Lowcross;  Mr.  Thomas  Phillips,  of 
Helmsley,  and  Mr.  Thomas  Outhwaite,  of 
Bainesse. 

189 


The  following  were  the  conditions  to  be 
submitted  by  the  representatives  of  the  re- 
spective machines: 

The  machines  to  be  tried  on  wheat  and 
barley  in  such  order,  and  for  such  lengths  of 
time,  as  the  jurymen  may  direct.  The  jury  to 
have  full  power  to  use  any  means  they  deem 
advisable  in  order  to  put  the  machines  to  the 
severest  trial.  The  jury  in  deciding  on  the 
merits  of  the  two  machines,  to  take  into  their 
consideration : 

Conditions         1st.  Which  of  the  two  cuts  corn  in  the  best 
of  the  manner. 

Contest 

2d.  Which  of  the  two  causes  the  least  waste. 
3d.  Which  of  the  two  does  the  most  work 
in  a  given  time. 

4th.  Which  of  the  two  leaves  the  corn  in  the 
best  order  for  gathering  and  binding. 

5th.  Which  of  the  two  is  the  best  adapted 
for  the  ridge  and  furrow. 

6th.  Which  of  the  two  is  the  least  liable  to 
get  out  of  order. 

7th.  Which  of  the  two  at  first  cost  is  least 
price. 

8th.  Which  of  the  two  requires  the  least 
amount  of  horse  labor. 

9th.  Which  of  the  two  requires  the  least 
amount  of  manual  labor. 

190 


day  been  fine  the  number  of  spectators  present 
yesterday  (Thursday)  would  have  been  at 
least  fourfold  what  it  was.  Bad  as  the  weather 
was,  not  only  was  there  a  large  muster  of 
members  of  the  society,  but  803  persons,  many 
of  them  from  a  considerable  distance,  paid  six- 
pence each  for  admission  to  the  ground.  The 
trial  of  the  rival  machines  was,  unfortunately, 
so  short,  and  conducted  under  such  adverse 
circumstances,  that  it  was  impossible  to  pro- 
nounce any  opinion  as  to  their  relative  merits; 
but  what  he  saw  of  Hussey's  was  as  satisfac- 
tory as  he  could  expect.  (Applause.) 

"Mr.  George  Reade,  of  Hutton  Lowcross, 
said,  had  it  not  been  for  the  boisterous  weather, 
the  receipts  of  the  Society  at  Ormesby  and 
Middlesbrough  would  have  been  marvelous. 
As  it  was,  there  was  a  large  assemblage  to  wit- 
ness the  trial  of  the  American  reaping  ma- 
chines, and  they  were  regarded  with  an  anxious 
desire  that  they  might  succeed.  Indeed,  let 
any  ingenious  mechanic — he  cared  not  whether 
he  was  English,  Scotch,  Irish,  American  or 
German — come  before  a  jury  of  the  farmers  of 
Cleveland  with  an  implement  or  machine  for 
the  improvement  of  Agriculture,  and  it  would 
be  judged  with  candor,  impartiality  and  up- 
rightness, and  the  inventor  should  go  home  sat- 
isfied that  he  had  experienced  fair  play.  (Ap- 
plause.) 

195 


"Mr.  Isaac  Wilson  proposed  the  health  of 
'The  Strangers.'  To  those  gentlemen  the  mem- 
bers were  greatly  indebted  for  their  attendance. 
Had  the  weather  permitted,  they  would  all 
have  experienced  much  pleasure  from  an  in- 
spection of  the  celebrated  reaping  machines  in 
action,  and  the  ingenious  draining  plough  of 
Mr.  Fowler,  which  did  him  very  much  credit. 
(The  toast  was  drank  with  musical  honors.) 

"Mr.  Pierce,  the  representative  of  Dray  & 
Co.,  being  called  upon  to  respond,  rose  and 
said,  bad  as  the  weather  had  been,  he  had  been 
delighted  with  his  visit  to  Middlesbrough.  The 
kindness  of  the  inhabitants  soon  made  him  no 
stranger.  He  was  not  four  and  twenty  hours 
in  the  place  before  he  fraternized  with  the 
whole  parish.  (Laughter.)  He  rejoiced  that 
Mr.  Hussey's  reaping  machine  was  now  in  the 
hands  of  a  jury  of  Cleveland  farmers.  It  would 
have  a  fair,  honest,  impartial  trial;  and  what 
more  could  an  Englishman  desire.  (Applause.) 
He  thanked  the  company  for  the  honor  which 
they  had  conferred  upon  their  visitors  from  a 
distance,  and  wished  continued  success  to  their 
flourishing  society.  (Applause.) 

Mr.  Hussey's         "Mr.  Hussey  was  next  called  upon,  and  said 
Toast  to  that  he  had  for  many  years  been  building  ma- 
England  chines  in  America.    If  he  had  had  the  least  idea 
of  the  interest  which  England  would  take  in 
the  reaping  of  crops  by  machinery,  it  would 

196 


the  corn  very  wet.  Everybody  there  was  as- 
tonished to  see  your  machine  brought  up  the 
field  at  a  trot,  cutting  its  way  to  the  admira- 
tion of  all  present;  it  not  only  cut  to  the  lean- 
ing corn,  but  it  cut  cross  over  the  corn  leaning 
to  the  left  of  the  postillion  (I  presume  I  must 
call  him).  McCormick's  machine  then  at- 
tempted to  start  (he  made  two  or  three  at- 
tempts) but  the  attendant  confessed  it  was  im- 
possible to  do  so.  That  there  might  be  no  mis- 
take about  it,  your  representatives  proposed 
that  their  machines  should  go  up  again;  the 
jury  said  'No!  we  are  satisfied  that  your  ma- 
chine can  cut  it  under  the  present  circum- 
stances,' and  so  ended  Thursday's  trial." 

From  the  Gateshead  Observer,  October  4. 

"We  left  the  members  and  friends  of  this 
society,  on  Friday,  the  26th  ult,  on  the  Show- 
ground at  Middlesbrough,  immersed  in  rain. 
The  scene  now  shifts  to  the  Townhall,  where, 
in  a  handsome  and  spacious  apartment,  we  find 
them  assembled  in  the  evening,  to  dinner,  to 
the  number  of  150,  with  the  Earl  of  Zetland  in 
the  chair,  and  in  the  vice-chair  Mr.  John 
Vaughan,  of  the  firm  of  Bolckow  &  Vaughan, 
iron-masters  and  manufacturers.  His  lordship 
was  supported  by  the  Rev.  W.  F.  Wharton,  of 
Birmingham,  and  Messrs.  J.  T.  Wharton, 
Henry  Pease,  G.  D.  Trotter,  Isaac  Wilson, 

193 


George  Coates,  J.  W.  Pease,  George  Reade, 
John  Pierson,  etc.;  and  the  vice-chair  by 
Messrs.  C.  Dryden,  W.  Fallows,  R.  Chilton, 
etc.  In  the  body  of  the  hall  were  the  leading 
inhabitants  of  the  town  and  neighborhood; 
also,  Mr.  Burgess  and  Mr.  Samuelson  (who  had 
come  to  the  meeting  with  Mr.  McCormick's 
reaping  machine),  Mr.  Hussey,  the  inventor 
of  the  reaper  which  bears  his  name,  and  Mr. 
Pierce  and  Mr.  Stevens  (on  the  part  of  Messrs. 
Dray  &  Co.,  agents  for  Mr.  Hussey). 

"On  the  removal  of  the  cloth,  the  noble 
Chairman  (behind  whose  seat  was  inscribed  on 
the  wall  in  conspicuous  characters,  'Success  to 
the  Cleveland  Agricultural  Society — Eigh- 
teenth Anniversary')  gave  the  customary  loyal 
toasts,  and  took  occasion  to  observe  that  had 
it  not  been  for  the  Exhibition  of  Industry,  pro- 
jected by  Prince  Albert,  the  'Reaping  Ma- 
chine,' from  which  he  anticipated  great  benefits 
to  agriculture,  would  not  have  been  introduced 
into  this  country.  (Applause.) 

"The  Earl  of  Zetland  again  referred  to  the 
reaping  machine.  Such  an  aid  to  agriculture, 
his  lordship  observed,  was  needed  in  Cleveland 
and  elsewhere. 

"Mr.  J.  T.  Wharton,  of  Skelton  Castle,  said 
he  had  never  witnessed  so  much  enthusiasm  in 
an  agricultural  district  as  was  displayed  in 
connection  with  the  reaping  machine.  Had  the 

194 

\ 


mick's  machine.  The  other  was  in  the  hands 
of  the  inventor  himself,  Mr.  Hussey,  and  of 
Mr.  Pierce  and  Mr.  Steevens  (who  represented 
the  agents,  Messrs.  Dray  &  Co.) 

"The  Rev.  Mr.  Wharton  (the  jury,  compet- 
itors, etc.,  having  gathered  round  him  on  the 
field,  on  Saturday  morning)  announced  that 
after  the  lapse  of  an  hour,  when  the  corn  would 
be  in  such  a  condition  that  Mr.  Fawcitt,  as  he 
had  just  said,  would,  under  ordinary  circum- 
stances, reap  it  himself,  the  trial  would  com- 
mence. 

"The  question  was,  now,  which  of  the  two 
machines  should  begin.  A  'toss*  gave  the 
chance  to  Mr.  Pierce,  and  he  requested  Mr. 
Burgess  to  lead  off. 

"McCormick's  machine  then  got  into  action, 
taking  the  crop  in  the  most  favorable  manner 
— that  is,  leaning  toward  the  knife.  Passing 
along  the  field  (which  was  from  two  to  three 
hundred  yards  in  length)  it  cut  down  a  breadth 
of  little  more  than  four  feet.  The  corn  being 
laid,  the  flier,  of  course  did  not  come  into  prac- 
tical operation;  nor  was  it  necessary  that  it 
should  do  so— the  elements  having  already 
done  its  work.  The  corn  was  well  cut — the 
stubble  a  little  too  high. 

"Another  breadth  or  two  having  been  cut, 
Hussey's  machine  followed,  and  cut  some 

199 


breadths — somewhat  wider  than  McCormick's, 
and  closer  to  the  ground. 

"Mackenzie,  when  we  pointed  out  the  short- 
er stubble  of  his  rival,  admitted  the  fact,  but 
said  there  would  be  no  difficulty — not  the 
slightest — in  bringing  Mr.  McCormick's  knife 
nearer  to  the  ground.  In  America,  however, 
where  the  straw  is  comparatively  of  little  or  no 
value,  the  stubble  is  no  object,  and  there  are 
some  advantages  in  cutting  high. 

"A  backer  of  McCormick's  machine  (and 
many  bets  have  been  laid  on  the  two  machines) 
urged  that  Hussey's  would  spoil  clover  when 
going  among  wheat.  The  reply  was,  that  Hus- 
sey's knife  could  be  raised  or  depressed  at 
pleasure. 

"The  next  test  was  cutting  the  crop  across 
ridge  and  furrow,  so  that  the  corn  was  lying 
neither  to  nor  from  the  knife,  but  sidewise. 
Both  the  machines  cut  the  corn  under  these  cir- 
cumstances— Hussey's  the  cleaner  of  the  two. 

"The  jury  then  required  the  experiment  to 
be  made  along  the  field,  with  the  corn  lying 
from  the  knife. 

"Mr.  Hussey  consented,  and  the  machine 
succeeded  in  cutting  the  corn — leaving  a  tol- 
erable stubble,  but  not  so  short  and  regular  as 
before. 

200 


have  been  a  difficult  thing  to  keep  him  on  the 
other  side  of  the  Atlantic;  and  he  knew  not, 
now,  after  the  reception  which  he  had  met 
with,  how  he  should  ever  get  home  again.  (Ap- 
plause and  laughter.) 

"Mr.  Steevens,  Dray  &  Co.'s  engineer,  was 
also  called  upon  to  rise,  and  stated  that  his  em- 
ployers had  purchased  Mr.  Hussey's  machine 
because  they  saw  it  to  be  the  best,  and  they 
would  meet  every  competitor  in  the  three  king- 
doms, fearless  of  the  result.  (Cheers.) 

"[It  should  be  stated  that  Messrs.  Fowler, 
Burgess,  Samuelson,*  etc.,  had  by  this  time 
left  the  hall,  and  therefore  could  not  be  called 
upon.] 

"Mr.  Parrington,  having  read  the  award, 
announced  that  a  second  trial  of  McCormick's 
and  Hussey's  reaping  machines  would  be  made, 
if  the  weather  were  favorable,  on  the  following 
morning  (Saturday),  at  9  o'clock,  at  Mr.  Faw- 
citt's  farm.  The  jury,  appointed  by  the  com- 
mittee, would  give  no  opinion  on  the  trial  of 
the  previous  day  (Thursday).  That  would  go 
for  nothing.  They  would  devote  the  whole  of 
next  day,  if  necessary,  to  a  full,  fair,  and  satis- 
factory trial  of  the  two  machines.  (Applause.) 

"On  Saturday  morning,  the  weather  was  so 
far  favorable  that  there  was  no  rain.  The  trial, 


*  McCormick's   agents. 

197 


therefore,  took  place.  There  was  a  numerous 
gathering  of  land-owners,  farmers,  laborers, 
etc.,  but  not  so  crowded  a  muster  as  to  obstruct 
the  experiment. 

"The  foreman  of  the  jury,  Mr.  Thompson, 
being  unavoidably  absent,  his  place  was  sup- 
plied by  the  Rev.  W.  F.  Wharton,  of  Birming- 
ham. Messrs.  Lister,  Outhwaite,  (J.  and  T.  P.) 
Booth,  Wetherell,  Phillips,  and  Dobson,  were 
also  absent.  Their  places  were  filled  by  Mr. 
William  Morley,  Dishforth;  Mr.  Thomas  Par- 
rington,  Marton;  Mr.  J.  T.  Wharton,  Shelton 
Castle;  Mr.  Wm.  Hill,  Staunton;  Mr.  Joseph 
Coulson,  Sexhow;  Mr.  Joseph  Harrison,  White 
House;  Mr.  John  Mason  Hopper,  Marton. 

"The  trial  commenced  in  a  level  enclosure, 
adjoining  the  road  from  Stockton  and  Middles- 
brough to  Ormesby  Hall  (the  residence  of  Sir 
Wm.  Pennyman,  Bart.).  The  wheat  was  laid. 
We  have  seen  a  crop  in  worse  condition,  but 
not  often.  The  straw  was  damp  and  soft.  The 
soil  was  loamy  and  light,  and  the  field  free  from 
wet ;  it  was  to  Mr.  Fawcitt's  credit  that  he  was 
able  to  place  such  a  field  at  the  service  of  the 
society  under  the  circumstances ;  still,  the  earth 
was  in  a  state  to  clog  the  wheels  of  the  reapers. 
Altogether,  the  test  was  a  severe  one  for  the 
competitors.  Mr.  Samuelson,  Mr.  Burgess,  and 
Mr.  D.  C.  Mackenzie  (the  son  of  an  emigrant 
from  Ivernesse)  were  in  charge  of  Mr.  McCor- 

198 


he  would  soon  beat  the  inventor  himself.  Even 
I,  townsman  as  I  am,  made  fair  work;  and  in 
an  hour  or  two's  practice,  I  would  engage  to 
cut  a  crop  in  a  manner  not  to  be  found  fault 
with.  You  may  safely  say  that  any  ordinary 
workman  about  a  farm  would  be  able  to  man- 
age the  machine;  and  when  I  say  this  of  Hus- 
sey's,  it  is  also  true  of  McCormick's.  The  one 
may  be  a  better  machine  than  the  other,  but  the 
merits  of  either  of  them  may  be  brought  into 
practical  action  by  a  laborer  of  average  intelli- 
gence and  skill.  It  is  the  opinion  of  farmers 
and  others  with  whom  I  have  conversed,  that 
the  saving  per  acre,  by  the  use  of  Hussey's 
machine,  would  be  about  5s. 

"At  the  close  of  the  contest  on  Saturday, 
the  knives  of  the  two  machines  were  placed  in 
the  hands  of  Mr.  Robinson,  engineer  to  Mr. 
Bellerby,  of  York,  that  he  might  report  there- 
on, and  on  the  machinery  generally,  to  the  Jury. 

"Wednesday,  October  1. — The  Marquis  of 
Londonderry,  and  several  other  gentlemen, 
have  visited  Mr.  Fawcitt's  farm,  to  see  the  ma- 
chine at  work. 

"The  laurels  so  recently  placed  upon  the 
brow  of  Mr.  McCormick  have  been  plucked 
off — not  wholly,  but  in  great  part — by  his  fel- 
low countryman,  Mr.  Hussey. 

"We  would  enlarge  upon  this  theme,  but 
our  report  has  left  us  little  room.  We  would 

203 


only  say,  that  while  the  farmers  of  Cleveland, 
and  of  the  Island  generally,  are  turning  their 
attention  to  agricultural  improvements — by 
reaping  machines,  draining  ploughs,  and  steam 
ploughs — we  would  say  to  them,  in  the  words 
of  Mr.  Hussey  to  the  Cleveland  horse-jockey, 
when  his  machine  was  ready  for  its  work, 
'Now,  then,  go  ahead!" 

REPORT  OF  THE  JURY 

"The  Jury  regret  exceedingly  the  most  un- 
favorable state  of  the  weather  on  the  days  of 
trial  (a  perfect  hurricane  raging  during  the 
whole  of  the  first  day),  and  their  consequent 
inability  to  make  so  full  and  satisfactory  a  trial 
as  they  could  have  wished. 

"The  machines  were  tested  on  a  crop  of 
wheat,  computed  at  25  bushels  per  acre,  very 
short  in  the  straw,  and  if  possible,  more  laid 
than  the  wheat. 

"The  Jury,  taking  the  different  points  sub- 
mitted to  their  consideration,  in  the  order  as 
mentioned : 

"1.  Their  unanimous  opinion,  that  Mr. 
Hussey's  machine,  as  exhibited  by  Messrs. 
Wm.  Dray  &  Co.,  cut  the  corn  in  the  best  man- 
ner, especially  across  ridge  and  furrow,  and 
when  the  machine  was  working  in  the  direc- 
tion of  the  corn  laid. 

904 


"McCormick's  machine  was  then  tried,  and 
failed.  As  it  scoured  over  the  corn,  making 
sad  havoc,  there  were  loud  cries  of  'Stop! 
stop!  you're  wasting  it!' 

"Barley  was  next  cut,  with  much  the  same 
result.  In  this  case,  Mr.  Hussey  adjusted  his 
platform  for  discharging  the  corn  at  the  side. 

"The  binders  being  summoned  before  the  Hussey 
jury,  and  asked  which  of  the  two  machines  they  wins  6  to  4 
preferred,  so  far  as  their  particular  department 
was  concerned,  decided,  4  for  McCormick's,  6 
for  Hussey's. 

"Clover  was  now  to  be  tried,  but  at  this 
stage  of  the  proceedings  we  left  the  field. 
Clover-cutting,  we  should  state,  formed  no  part 
of  the  competition.  The  agreement  merely  re- 
fers to  wheat  and  barley.  McCormick's  ma- 
chine is  not  intended  for  clover-cutting;  but 
some  of  the  land  owners  and  farmers  were 
anxious  to  see  clover  cut  by  Hussey's  machine. 
Mr.  Thompson,  we  understand,  had  requested 
his  proxy  to  have  the  experiment  made.  We 
were  told  on  the  ground  that  the  machine  had 
already  been  tried  on  clover  at  Newport,  near 
Middlesbrough,  and  'cut  it  well — if  the  weather 
had  been  dry  it  would  have  cut  it  beautifully.' 

"It  was  pleasant  to  mark  the  anxiety  and 

watchfulness  of  the  gentlemen  in  charge  of  the 

two  machines.     Mr.  McCormick  suffered  no 

loss  from  his  absence,  he  was  so  admirably  rep- 

toi 


resented;  and  in  Messrs.  Pierce  and  Steevens, 
Dray  &  Co.  had  invaluable  agents— on  the 
Thursday  in  particular,  when  a  storm,  which 
ravaged  land  and  sea,  could  not  deter  them  or 
Mr.  Hussey,  from  practically  attesting  the 
reaper's  prowess  in  the  field.  The  trial, 
throughout,  was  conducted  with  a  fidelity  to 
self  which  would  not  throw  a  point  away,  and 
a  courtesy  to  rivals  which  should  ever  mark 
honorable  competition. 

From  a  Correspondent. 

"Stockton,  Monday,  September  29. — A  re- 
port reached  me,  after  I  left  the  farm,  that  Hus- 
sey's  machine  cut  the  barley  very  much  better 
than  McCormick's.  It  came  to  me,  however, 
through  parties  who  might  fairly  be  suspected 
of  a  bias,  and  therefore  I  kept  my  judgment  in 
suspense  until  I  could  obtain  information  on 
which  I  could  more  implicitly  rely.  This  I  have 
now  got.  I  have  been  to  the  farm  again  to- 
day, and  made  inquiries  of  persons  who  saw  the 
completion  of  the  trial.  McCormick's  machine 
did  not  cut  the  barley  so  well  as  Hussey's.  It 
cut  it  much  too  high ;  and  as  the  crop  was  very 
much  laid,  the  heads  only,  in  many  cases  were 
cut  off.  We  had  Hussey's  machine  in  opera- 
tion to-day,  both  on  barley  and  wheat,  and 
made  better  work  than  on  Saturday.  Mr.  Faw- 
citt  worked  it  with  the  greatest  ease.  I  think 


"2.  By  a  majority  of  eleven  to  one,  that 
Mr.  Hussey's  machine  caused  the  least  waste. 

"3.  Taking  the  breadth  of  the  two  ma- 
chines into  consideration,  that  of  Mr.  Hussey 
did  most  work. 

"4.  That  Mr.  Hussey's  machine  leaves  the 
cut  corn  in  the  best  order  for  gathering  and 
binding.  This  question  was  submitted  to  the 
laborers  employed  on  the  occasion,  and  decided 
by  them,  as  above,  by  a  majority  of  6  to  4. 

"5.  Their  unanimous  opinion  that  Mr. 
Hussey's  machine  is  best  adapted  for  ridge  and 
furrow. 

"6.  This  question  was  referred  by  the  Jury 
to  Mr.  Robinson,  foreman  to  Messrs.  Bellerby, 
of  York,  a  practical  mechanic  of  acknowledged 
ability,  whose  report  is  appended  below. 

"7.  That  Mr.  Hussey's  machine  at  first 
cost  is  less  price. 

"8,  9.  The  Jury  decline  to  express  a  de- 
cided opinion  on  these  points  in  consequence 
of  the  state  of  the  weather. 

"The  trials  took  place  on  the  farm  of  Robert 
Fawcitt,  of  Ormsby,  near  Marlbro'-on-Tees, 
who  in  the  most  liberal  and  disinterested  spirit 
allowed  his  crops  to  be  trodden  down  and  dam- 
aged to  a  very  great  extent,  especially  on  the 
25th,  when  in  spite  of  the  storm  an  immense 
crowd  assembled  to  witness  the  trials. 

205 


"The  Jury  cannot  conclude  their  report 
without  expressing  the  great  pleasure  they 
have  derived  from  seeing  two  machines 
brought  into  competition  that  were  able  to  do 
such  very  good  work,  and  also  at  witnessing 
the  friendly,  straightforward,  and  honorable 
way  in  which  the  exhibitors  of  the  respective 
machines  met  on  this  occasion. 

"Signed  on  behalf  of  the  Jury, 

"W.  F.  WHARTON,  Foreman." 

MR.   ROBINSON'S    REPORT   ON   QUESTION   6. 

"Having  carefully  examined  both  machines, 
and  given  the  subject  due  consideration,  I  am 
of  opinion  that  McCormick's  Reaping  Machine, 
as  at  present  made,  is  most  liable  to  get  out  of 
order. 

"(Signed)     THOMAS  ROBINSON. 

"York,  30th  September,  1851." 

From  the  London  Mercantile  Journal. 

"The  Great  Exhibition  and  Transatlantic 
Superiority  Over  European  Ingenuity — 
American  Reaping  Machines. — The  close  of 
the  Crystal  Palace  has  given  rise  to  many  pane- 
gyrics, and  we  would  not  for  one  moment  de- 
tract from  its  merits ;  it  has  been  deservedly  the 
admiration  of  the  world,  and  visited  by  thou- 
sands of  its  inhabitants.  Brought  into  life  by 

206 


the  most  eminent  men,  and  supported  by  roy- 
alty; the  means  taken  were  such  as  no  private 
individual  could  have  accomplished;  every  ex- 
ertion was  used  to  obtain  the  choicest  relics 
that  the  earth  could  produce;  almost  every 
country  vied  in  exhibiting  the  arts  and  treas- 
ures of  its  products  and  manufactures,  and 
were  with  one  exception  considered  eminently 
successful.  The  United  States  of  America, 
however,  was  thought  to  be  deficient,  and  in 
one  or  two  cases  some  rather  strong  and  even 
coarse  remarks  were  indulged  in.  But  what 
are  the  results?  France  can  boast  of  the  rich- 
ness of  its  silks  and  artificial  manufactures, 
and  England  of  its  machinery ;  but  we  find  that 
our  own  newspapers  are  filled  with  admiration 
at  the  inventions  of  Brother  Jonathan.  We 
shall  only  slightly  touch  upon  the  sensation 
produced  by  the  splendid  performance  of  the 
American  yacht,  and  the  dexterity  displayed  in 
the  lock-picking,  which  was  previously  deemed 
impracticable.  But  it  may  be  said  that  these 
are  trifling  matters  in  a  national  point  of  view; 
still,  facts  have  been  elicited  by  these  apparent 
trifling  incidents,  for  we  find  that  the  superior 
build  of  the  little  American  yacht  involves  a 
principle — it  being  now  admitted  that  in  nauti- 
cal matters  the  Americans  are  equal,  if  not 
superior,  to  other  nations  in  their  construction 
of  their  merchant  vessels,  and  also  in  the  equip- 

207 


ment  of  their  ships  of  war.  On  the  land  they 
are  equally  successful;  their  reaping  machines 
have  astonished  our  agriculturists.  We  ex- 
tract from  the  Gateshead  Observer,  and  other 
local  papers,  the  surprising  performance  of 
Hussey's  and  McCormick's  machines.  Our 
readers  are  aware  that  there  are  two  rival 
parties  competing  their  powers  on  British 
ground,  and  without  entering  into  the  question 
as  to  which  of  the  two  performed  their  work  in 
the  best  manner,  we  copy  the  result  of  the  trial. 
The  Durham  Advertiser  states  that  the  per- 
formance took  place  at  Middlesbro',  and  says: 
"  'Few  subjects  have  created  a  greater  sen- 
sation in  the  agricultural  world  than  the  recent 
introduction  into  the  country  of  the  reaping 
machines  of  Mr.  McCormick,  and  the  subse- 
quent appearance,  of  a  rival,  of  no  inferior  de- 
scription, in  a  similar  implement  from  Mr.  Hus- 
sey.  The  interesting  trial  of  the  two  in  compe- 
tition, intended  to  have  taken  place  on  Thurs- 
day last,  was  postponed,  in  consequence  of  the 
torrents  of  rain,  until  Saturday,  when,  under 
the  superintendence  of  a  very  efficient  jury 
empanelled  to  decide  the  respective  merits  of 
the  two  implements,  the  contest  came  off.  The 
compact  form  of  Hussey's  implement  was  in 
its  favor,  though  from  the  notoriety  of  McCor- 
mick's at  Mr.  Mechi's  farm,  the  general  prefer- 
ence was  at  first  on  his  side.  McCormick's  ma- 
ws 


chine  was  first  tried  against  the  inclination  of 
the  corn,  and  completed  its  portion  in  very 
good  style,  leaving  the  sheaves  in  a  handy  man- 
ner at  the  side  of  the  furrow.  Hussey's  com- 
pleted a  similar  breadth,  but  deposited  the 
sheaves  behind,  and  consequently  several  bind- 
ers were  required  to  follow  the  machine  to  clear 
the  course  for  cutting  the  next  breadth,  an  im- 
perfection, which,  however,  it  was  understood 
could  be  easily  remedied,  and  the  back  deliver 
replaced  by  a  side  one.  This  breadth  was  closer 
cut  than  the  one  executed  by  McCormick's 
reaper.  The  two  were  then  tried  across  the 
ridge,  where  Hussey's  implement  carried  the 
palm,  McCormick's  leaving  a  very  considerable 
portion  of  the  straw  standing  behind  it;  and 
the  last  trial  upon  the  wheat,  in  the  direction 
of  the  lean  of  the  wheat,  Hussey's  machine  did 
its  work  very  fairly,  while  McCormick's  was 
obliged  to  be  stopped  in  its  course,  after  having 
taken  the  heads  of  the  wheat,  but  left  the  whole 
of  the  straw  standing.  At  this  time  two 
opinions  did  not  exist  among  the  company  pres- 
ent— Hussey's  being  the  favorite.  The  trial  was 
then  carried  to  some  barley,  where  Hussey's 
again  succeeded  in  obtaining  public  favor.  The 
more  compact  form  of  Hussey's  implement,  as 
well  as  the  superiority  of  the  clipping  action 
over  the  cutting  action  of  McCormick's,  entitle 
it  to  a  greater  share  of  public  favor,  and  as  the 

209 


advantages  of  a  side  delivery  can  be  easily 
applied  to  it,  it  will  doubtless  become  the  more 
general  in  use  amongst  the  farmers.  We  can- 
not, however,  but  think  that  some  mechanical 
process  might  be  substituted  for  raking  the 
sheaf  from  the  receiving  board,  and  this  with 
a  few  other  mechanical  improvements,  would 
we  think,  make  Hussey's  reaping  machine  a 
perfect,  useful  and  economical  agricultural  im- 
plement. The  latter  may  be  also  advantageous- 
ly applied  to  the  cutting  of  clover  crops,  which 
is  quite  out  of  the  question  with  the  farmer. 
Another  Correspondent  on  this  subject  says: 
19  Oat  of  20  "The  jury  did  not  on  Saturday  announce  their 
Favored  decision,  nor  have  they  yet  made  a  report. 
iey  Nineteen  farmers  out  of  twenty  who  witnessed 
the  trial  were  in  favor  of  Hussey's  machine." 
"The  Gateshead  Observer  remarks:  'The 
great  Cleveland  contest  between  the  two  Amer- 
ican reaping  machines,  respectively  invented  by 
Mr.  McCormick,  of  Chicago,  and  Mr.  Hussey, 
of  Baltimore,  originally  appointed  for  Thurs- 
day, the  25th  ult.,  frustrated,  for  a  time  by  the 
deluge  and  hurricane  of  that  disastrous  day, 
came  off  on  Saturday,  the  27th.  The  trial  was 
one  of  great  severity,  the  crops  of  wheat  and 
barley  were  laid,  and  the  straw  damp  and  soft. 
The  laurels  so  recently  placed  upon  the  brow 
of  Mr.  McCormick  have  been  plucked  off — not 
wholly,  but  in  great  part,  by  his  fellow  coun- 

210 


tryman,  Mr.  Hussey.  Both  the  machines 
proved  their  ability  to  do  good  work,  but  Mr. 
Hussey's  attested  its  superiority ;  and  the  Eng- 
lish farmer  has  now  seen,  thanks  to  Prince 
Albert  and  the  Exhibition  of  Works  of  Indus- 
try, that  his  corn  and  grasses,  hitherto  slowly 
and  laboriously  reaped  with  the  sickle  and  the 
scythe,  may  now  be  plained  off  the  land,  in 
five  feet  breadth,  as  rapidly  as  a  horse  can 
trot.' " 

"  'A  trial  has  taken  place  before  the  Cleve- 
land Agricultural  Society  of  the  respective 
merits  of  McCormick's  and  Hussey's  American 
Reaping  Machines,  and  the  report  of  the  jury 
of  practical  men,  appointed  by  the  consent  of 
both  parties  to  decide  the  question  of  merit  is 
favorable  to  the  latter  implement.  This  deci- 
sion throws  considerable  doubt  upon  the  jus-  A 
tice  of  the  award  of  a  great  medal  at  the  exhi- 

able  Doubt 

bition  to  McCormick's/ — London  Times,  Oc- 
tober 7." 

Following  upon  its  success  at  Cleveland,  the 
proprietors  were  invited  to  exhibit  the  machine 
at  the  Barnard  Castle  Agricultural  Society, 
Lord  Harry  Vane,  president. 

"Barnard  Castle,  October  8,  1851. 
"The  undersigned   President,   Vice   Presi- 
dents, and  members  of  the  Barnard  Castle  Ag- 
ricultural Society  and  others  who  have  wit- 
si  1 


nessed  the  working  of  the  American  Reaping 
Machine,  invented  by  Mr.  Hussey,  do  certify 
their  unqualified  approval  of  its  operations 
and  entire  success. 

"Lord  Harry  Vane,  President. 

"  W.  F.  Wharton,  Vice  President. 

"John  Mitchell,  V.  P.,  Forcett  Hall,  York- 
shire, Esq. 

"J.  S.  Edgar,  M.  D.,  Barnard  Castle,  Esq. 

"John  Dickonson  Holmes,  Barnard  Castle, 
Solicitor. 

"George  P.  Harrison,  Forcett,  Yorkshire, 
Esq.,  Farmer. 

"Edward  Scaith,  Keverston,  near  Darling- 
ton, Esq.,  Farmer,  and  Assistant  Draining 
Commissioner. 

"Thomas  Robinson,  Hutton  Hall,  near 
Richmond,  Yorkshire,  Esq.,  Farmer. 

"Richard  Kay,  Forcett  Valley,  near  Dar- 
lington, Esq.,  Farmer. 

"William  Harrison,  Greta  Bridge,  York- 
shire, Esq.,  Farmer. 

"Thomas  Carter,  Scales,  near  Richmond, 
Esq.,  Farmer. 

"Jno  Whitfield,  London,  Esq. 

"Rev.  Thomas  Boys  Croome,  Scotland. 

"William  Watson,  Jr.,  Barnard  Castle,  So- 
licitor. 

"J.  R.  Monkhouse,  Barnard  Castle,  Manu- 
facturer. 

212 


"Samuel  Nelson,  of  Scaife  House,  near 
Staindrop,  Durham,  Esq.,  Farmer. 

"William  Thompson,  Lanehead,  near  Ov- 
ington,  Yorkshire,  Esq.,  Farmer. 

"John  Ethwaite,  Bainesse,  near  Catterick, 
Yorkshire,  Farmer. 

"Rev.  George  Dugard,  Barnard  Castle,  In- 
cumbent of  Yorkshire,  Farmer. 

"William  Watson,  Secretary  of  the  Barnard 
Agricultural  Association." 

From  the  Darlington  and  Stockton  [England]  Times,  October  11. 

BARNARD   CASTLE  AGRICULTURAL 
SOCIETY. 

MR.    HUSSEY'S    REAPING    MACHINE. 

"Great  interest  was  excited  in  Barnardcas- 
tle  and  its  neighborhood  on  Tuesday  last,  by 
the  announcement  that  Mr.  Hussey's  reaping 
machine  would  be  exhibited  at  the  forthcom- 
ing meeting  of  the  Barnardcastle  Agricultural 
Society ;  and  that  a  trial  of  its  powers  would  be 
made  previous  to  the  meeting.  Accordingly, 
on  Tuesday  last,  the  machine  was  brought  into 
operation  in  a  field  of  barley,  belonging  to  Mr. 
George  White,  of  Stainton,  near  Barnardcastle, 
which  it  cut  admirably  well.  The  Rev.  W.  F. 
Wharton,  and  other  gentlemen  in  the  vicinity, 
besides  a  vast  number  of  farmers,  were  present. 
The  Judges  on  the  occasion  were  H.  S.  Thomp- 
son, Esq.,  of  Moat  Hall  (one  of  the  Agricul- 

213 


tural  Jury  of  the  Great  Exhibition)  ;  W.  Lister, 
Esq.,  of  Dunsa  Bank;  and  T.  Robinson,  Esq., 
of  Hutton.  Luncheon  was  provided  for  a  large 
party  in  an  out-building  near  the  scene  of  the 
experiments,  and  it  is  a  fact  worthy  of  notice 
that  after  dinner  Mr.  Thompson  proposed  the 
health  of  Mr.  Hussey  (who  was  present)  with 
great  fervour,  and  spoke  of  the  disadvantages 
under  which  Mr.  Hussey's  Machine  had  la- 
bored when  tried  against  McCormick's  for  the 
Great  Exhibition  Medal ;  Mr.  Hussey  not  being 
in  the  country  at  that  time,  and  no  one  being 
present  who  understood  the  adjusting  or  work- 
ing of  the  implement.  Mr.  Thompson  said  he 
was  now  so  thoroughly  satisfied  of  its  great 
merits  that  he  would  do  his  best  to  get  a  medal 
awarded  to  it.  After  luncheon,  the  machine 
was  taken  to  the  grounds  of  Mr.  Adamson,  and 
tried  upon  a  field  of  oats,  which  were  so  laid  as 
to  form  a  very  severe  test  to  the  machine,  but 
it  nevertheless  was  successful  there  also.  The 
party  retired  greatly  pleased  with  it,  and  some 
of  the  most  wary  agriculturists  ordered  ma- 
chines upon  the  ground.  On  Wednesday  morn- 
ing a  large  assemblage  of  agriculturists  met 
on  the  farm  of  Mr.  F.  Atkinson,  Westwood, 
Startforth,  to  see  the  machine  cut  a  field  of 
wheat,  and  there  again  the  experiment  yielded 
all  that  even  its  inventor  could  desire.  We 
understand  that  a  large  number  of  orders  were 

214 


given  for  machines  by  the  farmers  present, 
which  is  perhaps  the  very  best  test  of  their 
views  in  the  matter.  The  general  impression 
seemed  to  be  that  it  would  prove  of  incalcula- 
ble value  to  the  agricultural  interest. 

"At  about  3  o'clock  in  the  afternoon,  a  large 
party  sat  down  to  a  sumptuous  dinner  at  the 
King's  Head  Inn.  Lord  Harry  Vane  presided 
and  the  Rev.  W.  F.  Wharton  occupied  the  vice- 
chair.  After  dinner  the  usual  loyal  toasts  hav- 
ing been  proposed,  the  vice-chair  proposed  the 

A  Toast  to 

health  of  Mr.  Hussey ;  that  gentleman,  he  said,  Mr  Hussey 
had  contributed  to  their  gratification  and  in- 
terest in  bringing  his  invention  there  for  trial; 
the  result  of  that  trial  had  exceeded  every- 
thing they  could  have  previously  imagined  or 
hoped;  and  therefore  he  begged  they  would 
excuse  him  for  proposing  this  health  so  early, 
as  Mr.  Hussey  and  his  agents's  representative, 
Mr.  Pierce,  had  to  leave  by  the  first  train  from 
Darlington,  which  they  had  then  but  sufficient 
time  to  reach.  He  proposed  the  healths  of  Mr. 
Hussey  and  of  the  enterprising  firm,  Messrs. 
Dray  &  Co.,  who  had  undertaken  to  bring  that 
machine  into  the  British  market.  The  toast 
was  drank  with  honors.  Mr.  Hussey  briefly 
returned  thanks. 

"After  some  further  proceedings,  the  Vice- 
Chairman  proposed  the  health  of  the  President. 
Lord  Harry  Vane  responded. 

in 


"The  healths  of  the  Vice-Presidents  were 
proposed.  Mr.  Mitchell  briefly  responded.  Mr. 
Wharton,  in  acknowledging  the  toast,  took  the 
opportunity  of  again  bringing  before  the  meet- 
ing the  merits  of  the  invention  which  had  been 
the  object  of  that  day's  attraction.  It  had  been 
most  unfortunate  that  when  the  trial  took 
place  for  the  prize  of  the  great  exhibition,  Mr. 
Hussey  had  not  arrived  in  this  country — no- 
body knew  how  it  was  managed,  whilst  Mc- 
Cormick's  was  properly  attended  to.  Mr.  Hus- 
sey's  machine  did  no  work,  and  Mr.  McCor- 
mick  took  the  medal.  No  sooner  did  Mr.  Hus- 
sey arrive  than  he  prayed  for  a  further  trial, 
but  the  Jury  could  not  grant  it.  All  difficulty 
was  removed  by  Mr.  McCormick  throwing 
down  the  gauntlet.  The  trial  came  off  in 
Cleveland — the  result  was  clear  and  satisfac- 
tory in  favor  of  Mr.  Hussey's  machine  as  de- 
cidedly superior.  Mr.  Thompson,  of  Moat 
Hall,  one  of  the  Great  Exhibition  Jury,  was 
"A  Worthy,  a^so  one  °^  ^e  Judges  in  Cleveland,  and  was 
Modest  and  so  satisfied  on  the  subject  that  he  left,  deter- 

mined  t0  UrgC  f°r  a  mCdal  f°r  Mn  HuSSeV'     Jt 

must  be  a  source  of  pleasure  to  all  to  find  that 
justice  was  thus  about  to  be  done  to  a  worthy, 
modest  and  unassuming  man." 

216 


From  the  Darlington  and  Stockton  Times,  October  11,  1851. 

THE  REAPING  MACHINES  AT  BARNARD- 
CASTLE. 

"To  the  Editor  of  the  Darlington  and  Stock- 
ton Times: 

"Sir — I  beg  to  trouble  you  with  a  few  par- 
ticulars of  Mr.  Hussey's  American  Reaping 
Machine,  which  I  yesterday  saw  working  in  a 
field  near  Barnardcastle.  I  am  not  a  farmer, 
and  of  course  cannot  be  thoroughly  au  fait  at 
describing  an  agricultural  implement,  nor  am 
I  sufficiently  versed  in  mechanics  to  explain  to 
you  the  construction  of  the  machine  in  all  its 
details,  but  of  the  result  I  can  speak,  and  that 
with  confidence. 

"Drawn  by  two  horses,  a  man  seated  on  the 
near  side  horse  as  driver,  this  wonderful  im- 
plement was  drawn  with  perfect  ease,  at  more 
than  the  rate  of  three  miles  an  hour,  round  and 
round  a  field,  partly  in  wheat  and  partly  in 
barley,  cutting  a  breadth  of  corn  in  its  progress 
with  a  regularity  and  evenness  that  was  sur- 
prising. No  straggling  stalks  of  corn  were  left, 
none  of  the  slovenly  irregular  work  too  often 
seen  where  manual  labor  is  employed  was  to 
be  discovered;  on  the  contrary,  the  field  after 
shearing,  looked  nearly  as  smooth  and  even  as 
a  kitchen  floor  or  turnpike  road.  The  farmer 
has  now  no  longer  occasion  to  be  behind  the 

917 


reapers,  dinning  in  their  ears,  'shear  low' — 'now 
do  shear  low;'  for  this  machine,  with  a  very 
simple  adjustment,  will  cut  the  corn  as  low  as 
he  can  possibly  require.  A  seat  on  the  ma- 
chine is  provided  for  a  man,  who,  with  a  large 
rake,  and  with  motion  resembling  the  pushing 
of  a  punt,  removes  the  corn  from  the  machine 
as  it  is  cut,  and  leaves  it  for  the  binders  to  put 
together  in  sheafs. 

"The  assistance  of  two  men  and  two  horses 
are  thus  all  that  is  required  to  draw  and  to 
guide  this  wonderful  sickle — and  so  manned, 
it  will  cut  with  the  ease  and  regularity  I  have 
described,  from  perhaps  ten  to  twelve  acres  in 
the  working  day.  Nor  as  far  as  I  could  see,  or 
learn  from  the  observation  of  others,  does  there 
appear  to  be  any  drawback  against  its  general 
adoption.  Its  price  (£21)  is  not  exorbitant — 
its  construction  is  not  so  complex  as  to  cause 
a  fear  of  frequent  repairs  being  required;  men 
of  the  common  run  of  agricultural  laborers  are 
quite  competent  to  go  with  it,  and  the  work  of 
drawing  it  is  not  distressing  to  the  horses. 
Neither  does  the  nature  of  the  ground  appear 
to  be  much  an  object,  for  it  traveled  as  well 
over  ridge  and  furrow  as  it  did  upon  a  level. 

"Nothing  could  be  more  unanimous  than 
the  approval  of  which  the  machine  met  with 
from  all  who  saw  its  work,  and  I  was  informed 
that  nine  machines  were  ordered  on  the 

m 


ground.  Among  the  purchasers  was  the  Duke 
of  Cleveland,  who,  with  Lord  Harry  Vane,  was 
present  and  examined  its  working  and  con- 
struction minutely.  The  curiosity  excited  by 
the  machine  was  great,  and  an  immense  num- 
ber of  people  visited  the  ground  during  the  two 
days.  Noblemen  and  gentlemen,  farmers  and 
farm  laborers,  tradesmen  and  mechanics,  men 
and  women,  flocked  to  see  the  implement  which 
from  the  other  side  of  the  Atlantic  has  come  to 
effect  so  important  a  revolution  in  the  labor  of 
the  harvest  field,  and  all  were  agreed  that 
Brother  Jonathan,  though  still  a  young  man, 
had  some  clever  notions  in  his  head,  and  that 
John  Bull,  in  the  case  of  the  reaping  machine, 
would  not  be  above  taking  advantage  of  his  in- 
telligence. I  am,  etc.,  <<A  fi  „ 

From  the  London  Daily  News. 

HUSSEY'S  REAPING  MACHINE— TRIAL 
BEFORE  PRINCE  ALBERT. 

"The  celebrated  battle  of  the  Ganges  hardly 
excited  more  interest  in  the  railway  world  than 
the  battle  of  the  Reaping  machines  has  lately 
created  in  the  agricultural  world;  nor  is  the 
result  perhaps  very  much  less  important  in  the 
latter  case  than  in  the  former. 

"Of  the  recent  inventions  for  diminishing 
the  cost  of  production,  the  most  remarkable  are 

919 


undoubtedly  the  Reaping  machines  of  Messrs. 
Hussey  and  McCormick.  Perhaps  it  would  be 
more  accurate  to  call  them  importations  than 
inventions,  since  both  have  been  in  use  for  a 
considerable  time  in  America ;  and  amongst  the 
benefits  arising  from  the  Exhibition,  it  is  cer- 
tainly not  the  least  that  it  has  introduced  to  the 
agriculturist  of  Great  Britain  implements  of 
the  highest  practical  utility,  which  might  other- 
wise have  remained  forever  exclusively  in  the 
hands  of  their  brethren  across  the  Atlantic.  It 
will  be  remembered  that  a  trial  of  the  two  rival 
machines  took  place  last  summer,  at  Mr. 
Mechi's  model  farm  in  Essex,  having  been 
directed  by  the  royal  commissioners,  with  the 
view  of  determining  the  comparative  merits  of 
the  two  instruments,  whose  patentees  were 
competitors  for  the  forthcoming  medal  prizes. 
At  that  time  Mr.  Hussey,  the  American  in- 
ventor of  the  machine  called  after  his  name,  had 
not  arrived  in  the  country.  The  weather,  too, 
was  very  unpropitious  for  the  trial,  notwith- 
standing which  a  very  large  number  of  gentle- 
men were  present.  The  machines  were  tried 
upon  a  field  of  wheat,  and  the  result  was  such 
as  to  convince  all  present  of  the  superiority,  in 
every  point  of  view,  of  McCormick's  machine — 
a  conviction  which  was  subsequently  con- 
firmed by  the  fact  of  the  Exhibition  medal 
being  awarded  exclusively  to  the  patentee  of 

220 


1 

t 


that  machine.  The  tables,  however,  were  soon 
to  be  turned.  Mr.  Hussey  arrived  in  England; 
a  challenge  having  been  given  by  the  agents  of 
Mr.  McCormick,  it  was  accepted  by  Mr.  Hus- 
sey, and  his  English  agent,  Mr.  Dray;  and, 
after  a  fair  contest  before  the  Cleveland  So- 
ciety, at  Middlesbro',  near  Stockton-on-Tees, 
on  the  25th  and  27th  of  September,  a  jury  of 
twelve  agriculturists  pronounced  a  verdict  in 
favor  of  the  unmedalled  machine.  They  de- 
cided that  of  the  two  machines,  Hussey's  had  Hussey's 

the  preponderance  of  advantages — that  it  cut  b.y  ^f r 

11  111  ^"e  Best 

corn  m  the  best  manner,  caused  the  least  waste, 

did  the  most  work  in  a  given  time,  left  the  cut 
corn  in  the  best  order  for  gathering  and  bind- 
ing, was  the  best  adapted  for  ridge  and  furrow, 
was  the  least  liable  to  get  out  of  repair,  and 
was  the  least  price  at  first  cost.  On  the  two 
other  points  submitted  to  them,  namely,  which 
machine  required  the  least  amount  of  horse 
labor,  and  which  the  least  amount  of  manual 
labor,  the  jury  declined  to  express  a  decided 
opinion,  in  consequence  of  the  state  of  the 
weather." 

"There  have  been  many  other  trials  of  Hus- 
sey's machine  in  different  parts  of  the  country, 
and  the  result  has  been  so  far  uniformly  satis- 
factory. Amongst  these  we  have  now  to  men- 
tion a  very  interesting  one  which  took  place  by 
appointment  last  Saturday,  at  Windsor,  in  the 
921 


presence  of  his  Royal  Highness,  Prince  Albert, 
originating  in  a  correspondence  between  Gen- 
eral Wemyss,  on  behalf  of  the  Prince,  and 
Messrs.  Dray  &  Co.  of  Swan-lane,  the  agents 
for  Mr.  Hussey.  The  spot  selected  for  the 
trial  was  behind  the  statue  of  George  III,  at 
the  end  of  the  Long  Walk,  fern — of  which  there 
is  an  abundance  in  that  locality — being  the 
article  on  which  the  machine  had  to  operate. 
The  Prince  having  from  an  early  hour  in  the 
morning  been  engaged  in  shooting  in  the  vicin- 
ity of  the  statue,  at  half-past  twelve,  resigned 
his  gun,  and  proceeded  on  horseback,  in  com- 
pany with  General  Wemyss  and  Col.  Seymour, 
Arrival  of  to  the  spot  appointed  for  the  trial  of  the  ma- 
the  Prince  chine.  Dismounting  from  his  horse,  his  Royal 
Highness  saluted  briefly  and  gracefully  the  as- 
sembled company,  and  especially  Mr.  Hussey 
and  Mr.  Dray.  He  then  asked  a  few  general 
questions  respecting  the  history  of  the  ma- 
chine, and  observed  that  as  the  ground  selected 
was  very  uneven  (it  was  in  fact  remarkably  so) 
the  trial  would  be  a  good  one.  After  a  brief 
delay,  the  gear  being  declared  in  order,  on 
went  the  machine,  drawn  by  two  strong  horses, 
and  heedless  of  ruts  and  hillocks  in  its  course, 
which  was  very  rapid,  bringing  down  every 
thing  it  encountered  cleanly  and  completely, 
including  two  or  three  slices  of  turf  at  least  a 
foot  long,  and  more  than  an  inch  thick. 

222 


"The  performances  of  the  machine  were 
not  confined  to  one  single  course.  A  consid- 
erable amount  of  work  was  performed  in  the 
most  satisfactory  manner,  Mr.  Hussey  himself 
sitting  on  the  box  at  the  side,  and  throwing 
aside  what  was  cut  down  in  the  manner  best 
adapted  for  gathering  and  binding.  Indeed  the 
work  was  not  confined  to  the  fern;  a  rabbit 
which  was  not  accustomed  to  this  species  of  in- 
terference was  startled  and  cruelly  lacerated 
before  it  had  time  to  escape. 

"At  the  close  of  the  trial,  his  Royal  Highness  A  R°yal 
gave  a  practical  proof  of  his  favorable  opinion  Order 
by  ordering  two  of  the  machines  for  himself, 
one  for  Windsor  and  the  other  for  Osborne. 
He  then,  after  expressing  his  gratification,  rode 
back  to  the  game-keepers  and  resumed  his  gun. 
After  he  had  left,  the  machine  operated  well 
upon  some  rushes. 

"It  may  not  be  out  of  place  to  state  here 
that  Mr.  Dray's  explanation  of  the  failure  of 
the  Hussey  machine  at  Tiptree  Hall  (Mr. 
Mechi's  farm)  is  that  it  was  entirely  owing  to 
its  not  being  properly  managed.  On  that  occa- 
sion, he  says,  the  person  in  charge  of  it  was 
simply  a  porter  at  the  Exhibition,  who,  not 
understanding  the  matter,  neglected  to  clear 
away  the  wheat  as  it  was  cut  down,  in  conse- 
quence of  which  the  action  of  the  machine  was 
unavoidably  and  fatally  impeded.  We  wit- 

223 


nessed  the  result  at  Mr.  Mechi's,  and  certainly 
there  was  no  such  fault  on  Saturday.  The  pro- 
gress of  the  machine  was  notwithstanding  the 
unevenness  of  the  ground,  rapid  and  satisfac- 
tory ;  and  it  was  stated  as  a  fact  that  on  a  level 
ground  the  horses  used  in  drawing  may  trot, 
not  only  without  weakening  or  impeding  the 
action  of  the  knives,  but  even  with  advantages, 
as  by  that  means  the  cutting  requires  increased 
precision  and  force." 

The  following  is  Prince  Albert's  certificate : 

"Windsor  Castle,  Nov.  13,  1851. 

"Sir — In  answer  to  your  letter  addressed  to 

Gen.  Wemyss,  I  have  received  the  commands 

of  his  Royal  Highness,  Prince  Albert,  to  say, 

that  so  far  as  he  could  judge  of  Mr.  Hussey's 

A  Royal  Reaping  Machine,  from  its  performance  in  the 

Verdict  high  fern  at  Windsor  Park,  his  Royal  Highness 

is  disposed  to  form  a  very  favorable  opinion  of 

it,  and  has  ordered  one*  in  consequence  for  the 

use  of  his  own  farm.    His  Royal  Highness  can 

however  give  no  opinion  as  to  the  relative 

merits   of  this   machine   in   comparison   with 

those  of  others  which  he  has  not  seen  at  work. 

"I  have  the  honor  to  be,  sir,  your  obedient 

servant,  "GREY." 


*  The  Prince  ordered  two  Machines,  one  for  Windsor  and 
one  for  Isle  of  Wight. 

224 


From  Maidstone  &  South  Eastern  Gazette,  October  21,   1851. 

WEST  KENT  AGRICULTURAL  SOCIETY'S 
PLOUGHING  MATCH. 

HUSSEY'S   AMERICAN   REAPER. 

"A  distinguishing  feature  at  this  society's 
meeting  on  Thursday,  the  16th  inst.,  was  an 
exhibition  of  the  capabilities  of  the  above  ma- 
chine. The  session  of  the  year  of  course  pre- 
vented a  display  of  its  powers  on  anything  in 
the  shape  of  grain,  indeed  great  difficulty  was 
found  in  procuring  even  a  green  crop  on  which 
to  operate.  Undaunted  by  this  fact,  the  in- 
ventor was  determined  to  show  to  the  anxious 
hundreds  assembled  the  extent  of  the  ad- 
vantages to  be  derived  from  the  use  of  his 
reaper.  At  two  o'clock  the  machine  was  set  to 
work  upon  a  field  of  clover,  short  and  light  (as 
may  be  supposed),  where  its  performance  was 
effectual  as  it  possibly  could  be,  exciting  a  con- 
siderable amount  of  surprise  as  well  as  gratifi- 
cation. It  was  then  taken  to  a  piece  of  marsh 
land,  where  clumps  of  stout  rushes  in  many 
places  were  growing  in  thick  masses,  present- 
ing the  appearance  of  stunted  grain.  The  ma- 
chine passed  over  this  marsh,  cutting  the  rushes 
with  the  same  facility  as  if  it  had  been  corn, 
leaving  the  stubble  about  four  inches  long  and 
very  regular,  giving  also  a  good  representation 
of  the  manner  in  which  the  sheaves  of  wheat, 

225 


etc.,  are  usually  delivered.  Both  these  opera- 
tions, but  especially  the  latter,  were  considered 
severe  contests  of  the  capabilities  of  the  ma- 
chine. Taking  all  the  circumstances  into  con- 
sideration, the  performance  was  far  beyond  all 
reasonable  expectations.  It  was  a  question 
whether  the  excellent  work  of  the  58  competing 
ploughs,  or  the  extraordinary  novelty  of  Hus- 
sey's  machine  in  operation,  added  most  to  the 
gratification  of  the  large  assemblage  of  the 
leading  agriculturists  of  Kent." 

From  the  Kentish  Gazette,  November  11,  1851. 

"In  addition  to  the  interest  naturally  felt  by 
all  who  live  on  and  by  the  soil  in  its  proper 
cultivation,  there  was  an  unusual  degree  of  at- 
traction in  the  fact  that  a  reaping  machine  by 
Mr.  Hussey  (the  celebrated  American  Machin- 
ist) would  be  tested  upon  seven  acres  of  mus- 
tard adjoining  the  ploughing  field.  The  reap- 
ing was  commenced  about  twelve  o'clock,  and 
continued  for  a  considerable  period.  The  crop 
of  mustard  was  wet,  and  by  no  means  calculat- 
ed to  favor  the  experiment.  It  was,  however, 
after  the  machine  was  properly  arranged,  cut 
down  with  great  regularity;  and  at  a  speed 
equal  to  four  miles  an  hour  it  traversed  the  cir- 
cuit of  the  field,  hewing  its  way  through  the 
mustard,  quickly  followed  by  a  crowd  of  eager 

226 


observers,  whose  wondering  gaze  exhibited  at 
once  their  astonishment  and  admiration  of  its 
working.  Occasionally  the  level  of  the  cutters 
were  altered,  so  as  to  leave  a  greater  or  less 
length  of  stubble,  which  evinced  the  accurate 
adjustment  to  which  the  machine  could  be 
brought.  Some  portion  of  it  was  taken  to 
pieces,  and  the  whole  of  the  arrangements 
shown,  which  the  farmers  present  displayed  an 
eager  anxiety  to  investigate,  and  many  were 
the  questions  proposed,  and  satisfactorily  an- 
swered by  the  talented  inventor. 

"We  should  mention  that  the  undulation  of 
the  land  does  not  impede  its  operations  in  the 
least — as  it  was  well  observed  by  a  gentleman 
present,  that  where  a  cart  could  travel  there 
this  machine  could  also  go,  and  complete  its 
design.  No  previous  acquaintance  with  its 
principle  is  necessary  to  be  able  to  guide  its 
operation,  as  was  shown  by  Mr.  Neame,  Jr., 
who  mounted  the  platform  and  discharged  the 
functions  appertaining  to  the  party  who  re- 
moves the  corn  from  the  machine  after  it  is 
cut,  with  the  greatest  ease  and  precision.  In- 
deed the  most  unqualified  approval  was  given 
by  the  gentlemen  present,  to  the  applicability 
of  the  reaping  machine  to  the  purposes  for 
which  it  is  designed.  We  have  thus  entered 
into  minute  particulars,  because  this  is  the  first 

227 


opportunity  we  have  had  of  witnessing  the 
results  of  such  an  experiment,  attended  as  it 
was  with  every  degree  of  satisfaction.  Lord 
Sondes  gave  an  order  for  one  of  the  machines, 
and  we  understand  that  three  or  four  orders 
were  given  in  the  course  of  the  day. 

"At  the  dinner  which  followed,  the  chair- 
man gave  'Sir  John  Tyldon  and  the  visitors.' 

"Sir  John  Tylden,  as  a  member  as  well  as 
a  visitor,  replied  to  the  toast,  and  in  a  jocular 
strain  animadverted  on  the  suffering  of  the 
farmers  of  Faversham,  who  were  determined, 
like  a  celebrated  regiment  in  the  service,  to  'die 
hard.'  He  alluded  to  the  reaping  machine  of 
Mr.  Hussey,  which  he  characterized  in  contra- 
distinction to  that  of  Mr.  McCormick's  and  all 
others,  as  the  universal  reaping  machine,  of 
which  he  spoke  in  highly  approving  terms,  and 
passed  a  warm  eulogium  on  its  talented  in- 
ventor, and  the  country  he  represented,  which 
in  the  space  of  80  years  had  risen  from  a  wilder- 
ness to  her  now  exalted  position,  and  proud  of 
her  Anglo-Saxon  blood." 


THE  LIBRARY 
UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA 

Santa  Barbara 


THIS  BOOK  IS  DUE  ON  THE  LAST  DATE 
STAMPED  BELOW. 


Series  9482 


